PF Draft Prospect Stats

Muad'Dib — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 03:18:24 -0000

It's beginning to seem likely that if the Blazers hang on to their #24 pick they will draft a PF to back up LMA. Now, this first tells us a few things about the type of player the Blazers are likely to draft. First, the player has to be available at #24 or worth trading up for. Second, it seems unlikely that the Blazers will draft someone based on potential, as they are not looking for a starter. They'll be looking for a productive, efficient player who can back up LMA. This means we can narrow our search to productive, efficient power forwards that will be available at #24 or worth trading up for.

The big question then becomes how to measure "productive and efficient." It seems obvious that the best way to measure a player's productivity is to measure how many wins they create for their team (that's the point of the game, to win). A more productive player will produce more wins. It's as simple as that. Of course, that still leaves us with the question of how to measure the wins a player contributes. Fortunately, we actually have a stat for that. It's the Win Score, which was developed to come the closest to predicting a player's contributions to a team's win total.

This means we can take a look at a player's Win Score in college to give us an idea of how productive they will be at the NBA level. Conveniently, DraftExpress provides a Win Score per 40 on almost all potential draftees (they obviously don't have them for the Euros). Of course, these stats have to be taken with a grain of salt. Not all productive college players make productive NBA players. Many of them do, but some just have a style of play that suits college much better than the NBA. So these stats have to be combined with a look at how well a player's game could translate to the NBA. But for the most part, productive college players make productive NBA players.

So first, we make a list of PFs who are likely to be drafted:

Blake Griffin

Jordan Hill

DeJuan Blair

Tyler Hansbrough

Taj Gibson

Jeff Pendergraph

Josh Heytvelt

Jeff Adrien

Now, let's narrow down the list. First, we can throw out Blake Griffin and Jordan Hill as early lottery picks that the Blazers almost certainly won't get a chance at. DeJuan Blair and Tyler Hanbrough are projected to go ahead of #24, but we'll continue to consider them because they're not out of trading range. Now, let's find the most productive out of these in terms of win score per 40:

1. DeJuan Blair 21.8

2. Tyler Hansbrough 14.1

3. Jeff Pendergraph 13.4

4. Taj Gibson 13.3

First thing you'll notice out of our top four is that DeJuan Blair was an amazing contributor to Pitt's win total. He even had a better WS/40 than Blake Griffin. Of course, I'm not saying he'll be better than Blake Griffin. There are several issues with his game (6'7" guy with bad knees) that suggest that his game might not make a smooth transition to the NBA level. Still, he could lose more than seven points off of his win score and still be better than Tyler Hanbrough. For a reference point, this blog (which is the king of all stats win related and worth a read if you find this post interesting) gives us an average WS/40 for PFs drafted in the league to be 12.48. In other words, all of our top four are above average, but DeJuan Blair significantly so.

Let's assume however, that the Blazers don't trade into the late lottery to get Blair. We now are faced with a choice between Hansbrough, Pendergraph, and Gibson. As you can see, the difference between them is negligible, especially considering room for continuing change and development in the NBA. Hansbrough is slightly better than the other two, but probably not worth trading up for. Between Gibson and Pendergraph, the difference in productivity is nonexistent, and it simply comes down to whomever the Blazers like more. Considering how Pendergraph seemed to impress in his workout for the Blazers on Wednesday, I'd assume it would be Pendergraph.

So what conclusions can we draw from all of this? First, we can see that there are four better than average PFs at efficiency that the Blazers should consider. Second, out of these four, Blair was the most efficient in college. If we trade up, it should be to get Blair, not Hanbrough. Third, because Hansbrough, Pendergraph, and Gibson all are close to statistically even, it makes most sense for the Blazers to stay at #24 and draft Pendergraph. This makes even more sense considering how Pendergraph seemed better than Hansbrough at his workout with the Blazers. He seems to be what you'd want in a backup PF. He's a smart, low-mistake player who most importantly contributes above average win totals to the team he plays for. Since the point of the game is to win, it makes most sense to draft the players that are best at winning.

(Note: I just want to emphasize that WS/40 does not tell us everything about a player. I'm not saying it's the only thing teams should draft on. I don't want a thousand comments telling me that stats aren't the only thing you should consider. I'm just saying that productivity tends to translate from college to the pros and should definitely be considered in our debate over the best PF for the Blazers to draft. I'd also like to once again highlight the significant contribution of this blog to this post.)

Clearing Up the Bayless-Draft Debate

Muad'Dib — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:10:45 -0000

Everyone seems to be really worried over one question: Can Jerryd Bayless be our PG of the future? There are a lot of doubts as to whether a score-first combo guard is really the answer to our current situation. Some even seem disappointed that Kevin Pritchard didn't trade the 13th pick and Josh McRoberts for Chris Paul, Jason Kidd, and Deron Williams. I mean, we all knew that he would land three all-star points in the same draft, so where are they?

What I haven't seen is a realistic look at what we actually got on draft night. Everyone seems to be either really doubtful or unrealistically optimistic; either Jerryd Bayless won't be able to solve our PG problem and is therefore a complete failure or he will magically turn into the next Chauncey Billups. No one seems to find the positive aspects in the trade without being completely unrealistic by suggesting that Jerryd will be the answer to all the Blazers' needs. So here are my reasons why it really doesn't matter whether or not Jerryd is the right PG for us when evaluating the success of the draft:

1. We've been spoiled by KP. He's drafted at least three future all-stars in the past two drafts. Everyone is expecting another miracle. We want to see another future all-star. Everyone's expectations were so high that when we didn't come away with everything we needed, we were disappointed.

2. Because Jerryd is a PG, people assume that he should be the future at that position for the Blazers. Everyone is evaluating him as a starter. Really, though, he should be looked at in terms of who he's replacing: Jarrett Jack. Jerryd will definitely be an improvement over Jack, even if he doesn't become a polished 1. If nothing else, we improved at the backup point guard spot for when we find a real starter.

3. In fact, the trade with Indiana is really about improvement. Essentially, we traded our 13th pick for upgrades on current players. Bayless is an upgrade over Jack and Diogu, as a player who has at least proven that he can play at an NBA level, is an upgrade over McRoberts.

So KP may not have come away with an all-star. He may not have even come away with our starting PG. But what he did do was improve our roster and give us a chance at that starting PG that we need. People want the PG issue to be solved now, whether that means that Bayless is the starter we're looking for or having either Roy or Rudy play point (which, by the way, wouldn't work). And this makes them overlook what actually happened in the draft: we improved at each spot that we traded away. And this, in the future, puts us in a better position when we do find our starting PG. So I hope everyone will realize that we had another good draft even if we don't come away with our starter. The debate over the point has gotten ridiculous; people are way too impatient. We can get a starting point guard, if not Bayless, then in free agency or in a trade. For now, though, we improved at the backup PG and that's what matters. I don't expect us to have found a starter at the point for at least another season, which makes all this debate now pointless. What happened in the draft was improvement and that's what matters. That is why drafting Bayless, even if he doesn't turn out to be a starting PG in the league, was a good move.

SB Nation User Blog: Muad'Dib

PF Draft Prospect Stats

Clearing Up the Bayless-Draft Debate