|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
 Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
PHILosopher
Starting Rotation
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 168
|
| Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
I see what you're saying, If we're using this as a precise template of draft order, then yeah I think mine would look different too.
But, it looks like they're getting the general ordering of talent right.
This concerns me because my preferred pick at 4, DG, is much lower in their 2019 rankings and Culver, who I have a hard time getting behind, is way up there.
I guess that's why I don't get paid to be a talent scout.😁 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
I see what you're saying, If we're using this as a precise template of draft order, then yeah I think mine would look different too.
But, it looks like they're getting the general ordering of talent right.
This concerns me because my preferred pick at 4, DG, is much lower in their 2019 rankings and Culver, who I have a hard time getting behind, is way up there.
I guess that's why I don't get paid to be a talent scout.😁 |
I think that report gave a lot of sobering information about Garland... I'm only going by the eye test which is that his shot and handles look good and we need someone who can shoot. I was big on drafting Coby before we moved up in the draft.
If we were 15th... even 20th in shooting, I could see drafting Culver or Clarke... I get what the guys who like them, see in them.
We are 29th and Lonzo and Caruso are our point guards. Can we draft Culver and move him for a shooter? I don't think he has much more value than Garland. We already know that Phoenix wants Darius... so if you are making the BPA argument... Garland is probably the more valuable trade asset.
At any rate... I appreciate all the work sites like the Stepien do... as well as our own draft gurus.
I still can't reconcile picking more defensive studs until we at least get to league average at shooting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosopher
Starting Rotation
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 168
|
| Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
Like I said I don't think they're getting the exact order right, but it does look like they were able to roughly rank the 2018 talent. So maybe we should take a closer look at Jontay Porter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
Like I said I don't think they're getting the exact order right, but it does look like they were able to roughly rank the 2018 talent. So maybe we should take a closer look at Jontay Porter. |
I liked him at 11. Drafting Porter or Bol at 4 would be the object of ridicule but at least those picks make more sense to me in terms of our needs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosopher
Starting Rotation
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 168
|
| Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 10:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
Like I said I don't think they're getting the exact order right, but it does look like they were able to roughly rank the 2018 talent. So maybe we should take a closer look at Jontay Porter. |
I liked him at 11. Drafting Porter or Bol at 4 would be the object of ridicule but at least those picks make more sense to me in terms of our needs. |
Yikes! It looks like J Porter has tore his ACL TWICE this season. No thanks.
https://www.sbnation.com/college-basketball/2019/3/23/18279019/jontay-porter-acl-tear-mizzou |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Thu May 23, 2019 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah their whole family seems cursed... even their sister had some injury.
I asked if their issues were somehow genetic or caused by some innate structural weakness or simply fluke luck but no one seemed to know.
But at least drafting a stretch big fills a need as I'd guess our chances at Brook are low.
Such a huge error... but if the Bucks go out this series, I'd make a play for Brook, Mirotic, or even Ilyasova. They can't pay all of them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pask
Starting Rotation
Joined: 30 Jul 2002
Posts: 236
Location: Reus - Catalonia
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 12:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ChickenStu wrote: | | Hero Ball wrote: | | noahp45 wrote: | | You know everyone here was thinking we would get the 11th pick. And we ended up getting the 4th pick. That's a win in my opinion, Lakers should draft someone they need and call it a day. Trying to overthink it and trading down will = to a mistake. |
Lakers will try to exhaust all options.
This is a big year for us. |
Yes, they should explore all options, and do their evaluations. Say they just don't trust Garland, be it for his knee issue or any other reason. And say they know Phoenix covets him at 6. And say that in their evaluations, they decide that there is very little difference between Culver and Hunter, and those are the guys they have at the top of their board. Well, if all that happens, wouldn't it make sense to trade with the Suns for #6 and get another asset (like their 1st rounder next year) out of them? In that scenario, you'd be guaranteed to get either Culver or Hunter at 6, and if the Cavs do something like take Reddish at 5, you'd actually have your pick of Culver/Hunter at 6.
This is just one example of why you do your due diligence. |
Mostly everybody agree on the three first picks, but afterwards there´s no consensus. If there´s no consensus, probably it´s because there´s a few interesting players with different upsides/downsides, but with similar talent level.
If our management doesn´t have a clear cut pick, it makes all the sense to draft down, let's say for Atlanta´s 8-10 picks.
Seems to me there can be very intesreting options with both picks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The God Particle
Star Player
Joined: 01 May 2015
Posts: 2196
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 3:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: |
Yeah their whole family seems cursed... even their sister had some injury.
I asked if their issues were somehow genetic or caused by some innate structural weakness or simply fluke luck but no one seemed to know.
But at least drafting a stretch big fills a need as I'd guess our chances at Brook are low.
Such a huge error... but if the Bucks go out this series, I'd make a play for Brook, Mirotic, or even Ilyasova. They can't pay all of them. |
I was a big fan of Jontay last year, and I suppose I still am, but man, the knee issues do run in the family. I read sometime earlier this year that one of their sisters (they have 2) retired from basketball after her 5th(!!!) ACL tear. They have a second sister who ALSO retired (and came back if I recall) after also having serious knee issues.
Talk about that family winning the lottery in more ways than one (talent and health issues).
He's still so young though, I don't think he turns 20 (even though he finished his sophmore season) until later this year.
Last edited by The God Particle on Fri May 24, 2019 3:49 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JUST-MING
Retired Number
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 43990
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 3:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
Their 2018 rankings look great so far, what are you talking about? |
Moe Wagner?  . |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The God Particle
Star Player
Joined: 01 May 2015
Posts: 2196
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| JUST-MING wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
Their 2018 rankings look great so far, what are you talking about? |
Moe Wagner? . |
Yeah, but...that infections energy on the bench!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
My rankings are on the draft board of this very website.
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosopher
Starting Rotation
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 168
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
I see what you're saying, If we're using this as a precise template of draft order, then yeah I think mine would look different too.
But, it looks like they're getting the general ordering of talent right.
This concerns me because my preferred pick at 4, DG, is much lower in their 2019 rankings and Culver, who I have a hard time getting behind, is way up there.
I guess that's why I don't get paid to be a talent scout.😁 |
I think that report gave a lot of sobering information about Garland... I'm only going by the eye test which is that his shot and handles look good and we need someone who can shoot. I was big on drafting Coby before we moved up in the draft.
If we were 15th... even 20th in shooting, I could see drafting Culver or Clarke... I get what the guys who like them, see in them.
We are 29th and Lonzo and Caruso are our point guards. Can we draft Culver and move him for a shooter? I don't think he has much more value than Garland. We already know that Phoenix wants Darius... so if you are making the BPA argument... Garland is probably the more valuable trade asset.
At any rate... I appreciate all the work sites like the Stepien do... as well as our own draft gurus.
I still can't reconcile picking more defensive studs until we at least get to league average at shooting. |
Good point.
The mystery surrounding DG, as well as teams desire to find the next dynamic guard, a la Dame, will make him the best trade bait among the picks leftover after 3.
If we don't see any other standout talent, maybe we should draft him just for this reason.
We already know he has promises in the draft (one of only a handful of players), maybe we could get something out of those teams. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PHILosopher
Starting Rotation
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 168
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
https://mobile.twitter.com/wojespn/status/1130896806748020737?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwgr%5E393039363b636f6e74726f6c&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-16104068041540118295.ampproject.net%2F1905140117570%2Fframe.html
If we take the 1st/2nd team rookie squads and compare that to their 2018 rankings, it looks like they did a really good job on their 1st team talent evaluation but wiffed on their 2nd team talent evaluation.
There are quite a few players on the 2nd who are pretty low on their rankings. Shai, Mitchell, Shamet, Sexton, we're all ranked under 15! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vicman
Star Player
Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 2379
Location: Arcadia
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The more I look at the draft and also the players who could possibly join us in free agency the more I think of trading back and drafting Hayes or that good shooting 19 year old 7 footer maybe get a future first from a team or the 8 and 10 from Atlanta. With the players likely to join being kemba, Kyrie or butler seems to me a big is the biggest need. Trade back is the best plan. One idea that I don’t know if they would do it but if they plan on keeping the center they have a bamba and 16 for 4 might be interesting possible draft a draft a shooter at 16 like the kid of of Kentucky. Fill two needs rim protection and shooter then add one of Kyrie, butler or kemba and call it an off season |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 9:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
https://mobile.twitter.com/wojespn/status/1130896806748020737?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwgr%5E393039363b636f6e74726f6c&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-16104068041540118295.ampproject.net%2F1905140117570%2Fframe.html
If we take the 1st/2nd team rookie squads and compare that to their 2018 rankings, it looks like they did a really good job on their 1st team talent evaluation but wiffed on their 2nd team talent evaluation.
There are quite a few players on the 2nd who are pretty low on their rankings. Shai, Mitchell, Shamet, Sexton, we're all ranked under 15! |
1) Why would anyone project young talent based on a one year snapshot? It's a good sign when guys make the All-Rookie squads, but it's not definitive since it privileges more physically mature and older players as well as inefficiency monsters like Jahlil Okafor and Collin Sexton. I haven't read The Stepien's masthead since its formation, but I'd be surprised if the site's writers weren't making their evaluations and rankings based on more long-term projections of 5 years or more into the future. Kyle Kuzma may be better out of the gate than Lonzo (he really wasn't, but NBA voters thought so), but who do you think will be better at age 25 between the two?
2) It's odd to ding them for having Mitchell Robinson at #19 when he was passed over by the professional talent evaluators until pick #36. It's early on, but they'll likely be right that the Lakers should've drafted him over Moe Wagner at #25. They had Shamet at #24 and he went #26. Shai obviously should've been higher in their rankings than Williams, Melton, and Huerter, but they still had Shai at #15, Williams had the second highest BPM among rookies behind Robinson (small sample size alert), Huerter looked damn solid as a rookie, and Melton has a chance to develop into a useful PatBev type in time after a strong rookie season on defense.
3) Comparisons to the rankings of other draft sites at ESPN/DX, NBADraft.net, SI, The Ringer, BR, etc. would be useful.
4) Lastly, these kinds of assessments really need to be more rigorous and have baseline terminology from which to start. First and foremost, how are we assessing the value of a player? VORP? RAPM? PIPM? All-Star apprarances? What's our timeline for assessment? 3 or 5 or 8 years? What do we value in draft rankings more: getting the big ones right (like having Jokic top-5 in 2014) or getting as many of the "little things" right like having Porzingis over Okafor? We seem to be flying a bit blind here surrounded by a fog of data points.
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
https://mobile.twitter.com/wojespn/status/1130896806748020737?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwgr%5E393039363b636f6e74726f6c&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-16104068041540118295.ampproject.net%2F1905140117570%2Fframe.html
If we take the 1st/2nd team rookie squads and compare that to their 2018 rankings, it looks like they did a really good job on their 1st team talent evaluation but wiffed on their 2nd team talent evaluation.
There are quite a few players on the 2nd who are pretty low on their rankings. Shai, Mitchell, Shamet, Sexton, we're all ranked under 15! |
1) Why would anyone project young talent based on a one year snapshot? It's a good sign when guys make the All-Rookie squads, but it's not definitive since it privileges more physically mature and older players as well as inefficiency monsters like Jahlil Okafor and Collin Sexton. I haven't read The Stepien's masthead since its formation, but I'd be surprised if the site's writers weren't making their evaluations and rankings based on more long-term projections of 5 years or more into the future. Kyle Kuzma may be better out of the gate than Lonzo (he really wasn't, but NBA voters thought so), but who do you think will be better at age 25 between the two?
2) It's odd to ding them for having Mitchell Robinson at #19 when he was passed over by the professional talent evaluators until pick #36. It's early on, but they'll likely be right that the Lakers should've drafted him over Moe Wagner at #25. They had Shamet at #24 and he went #26. Shai obviously should've been higher in their rankings than Williams, Melton, and Huerter, but they still had Shai at #15, Williams had the second highest BPM among rookies behind Robinson (small sample size alert), Huerter looked damn solid as a rookie, and Melton has a chance to develop into a useful PatBev type in time after a strong rookie season on defense.
3) Comparisons to the rankings of other draft sites at ESPN/DX, NBADraft.net, SI, The Ringer, BR, etc. would be useful.
4) Lastly, these kinds of assessments really need to be more rigorous and have baseline terminology from which to start. First and foremost, how are we assessing the value of a player? VORP? RAPM? PIPM? All-Star apprarances? What's our timeline for assessment? 3 or 5 or 8 years? What do we value in draft rankings more: getting the big ones right (like having Jokic top-5 in 2014) or getting as many of the "little things" right like having Porzingis over Okafor? We seem to be flying a bit blind here surrounded by a fog of data points. |
The analytics/draft guru community seems to be rather incestuous and they often end up quoting each other. This isn't to say a lot of valuable work is not being done by them, but it reminds me of the film criticism community or even academia, where one flavor of the month gets acknowledged and then confirmation bias takes over where they all come up with the few names who never actually pan out or become overrated.
As I've said before, I'm a novice to this whole process... I studied comparative literature for 7 years so I have some facility in critical thinking at least enough to see that not many called Jokic or Donovan Mitchell and they were all over the place on Trae Young or Doncic.
It doesn't seem to be an exact science... it's seems more akin to meteorology or earthquake science where one can often effectively breakdown during a post mortem why such and such happened but who are much less successful at actually predicting what will occur.
Like the old Bob Dylan line about how you don't need a weatherman to tell you which way the wind blows... I think sometimes the old method where you'd pick people playground style works almost as well as breaking down the release point of someone's shot. Jerry West did fine picking talent this way, and it looks like reams of crowd sourced material still isn't outsmarting the old fox.
I guess my point is that while I enjoy reading these articles... I don't need a scientist telling me the reaction times of Eddie Van Halen's index finger to know he's an incredible guitar player. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Staccatos
Star Player
Joined: 16 Jul 2002
Posts: 2416
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The God Particle wrote: | | JUST-MING wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
Their 2018 rankings look great so far, what are you talking about? |
Moe Wagner? . |
Yeah, but...that infections energy on the bench! |
I hope Wagner works out, but right now he looks like just another Magic mistake.
Anyone know who the scouts wanted the Lakers to draft before Magic overruled them? Shamet, Williams, Robinson? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JustaObserver
Star Player
Joined: 20 May 2017
Posts: 3168
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Staccatos wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | JUST-MING wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
Their 2018 rankings look great so far, what are you talking about? |
Moe Wagner? . |
Yeah, but...that infections energy on the bench! |
I hope Wagner works out, but right now he looks like just another Magic mistake.
Anyone know who the scouts wanted the Lakers to draft before Magic overruled them? Shamet, Williams, Robinson? |
I heard Robinson had a promise but the fo got mad that he was putting it out on social media that lakers were picking him.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
https://mobile.twitter.com/wojespn/status/1130896806748020737?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwgr%5E393039363b636f6e74726f6c&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-16104068041540118295.ampproject.net%2F1905140117570%2Fframe.html
If we take the 1st/2nd team rookie squads and compare that to their 2018 rankings, it looks like they did a really good job on their 1st team talent evaluation but wiffed on their 2nd team talent evaluation.
There are quite a few players on the 2nd who are pretty low on their rankings. Shai, Mitchell, Shamet, Sexton, we're all ranked under 15! |
1) Why would anyone project young talent based on a one year snapshot? It's a good sign when guys make the All-Rookie squads, but it's not definitive since it privileges more physically mature and older players as well as inefficiency monsters like Jahlil Okafor and Collin Sexton. I haven't read The Stepien's masthead since its formation, but I'd be surprised if the site's writers weren't making their evaluations and rankings based on more long-term projections of 5 years or more into the future. Kyle Kuzma may be better out of the gate than Lonzo (he really wasn't, but NBA voters thought so), but who do you think will be better at age 25 between the two?
2) It's odd to ding them for having Mitchell Robinson at #19 when he was passed over by the professional talent evaluators until pick #36. It's early on, but they'll likely be right that the Lakers should've drafted him over Moe Wagner at #25. They had Shamet at #24 and he went #26. Shai obviously should've been higher in their rankings than Williams, Melton, and Huerter, but they still had Shai at #15, Williams had the second highest BPM among rookies behind Robinson (small sample size alert), Huerter looked damn solid as a rookie, and Melton has a chance to develop into a useful PatBev type in time after a strong rookie season on defense.
3) Comparisons to the rankings of other draft sites at ESPN/DX, NBADraft.net, SI, The Ringer, BR, etc. would be useful.
4) Lastly, these kinds of assessments really need to be more rigorous and have baseline terminology from which to start. First and foremost, how are we assessing the value of a player? VORP? RAPM? PIPM? All-Star apprarances? What's our timeline for assessment? 3 or 5 or 8 years? What do we value in draft rankings more: getting the big ones right (like having Jokic top-5 in 2014) or getting as many of the "little things" right like having Porzingis over Okafor? We seem to be flying a bit blind here surrounded by a fog of data points. |
The analytics/draft guru community seems to be rather incestuous and they often end up quoting each other. This isn't to say a lot of valuable work is not being done by them, but it reminds me of the film criticism community or even academia, where one flavor of the month gets acknowledged and then confirmation bias takes over where they all come up with the few names who never actually pan out or become overrated.
As I've said before, I'm a novice to this whole process... I studied comparative literature for 7 years so I have some facility in critical thinking at least enough to see that not many called Jokic or Donovan Mitchell and they were all over the place on Trae Young or Doncic.
It doesn't seem to be an exact science... it's seems more akin to meteorology or earthquake science where one can often effectively breakdown during a post mortem why such and such happened but who are much less successful at actually predicting what will occur.
Like the old Bob Dylan line about how you don't need a weatherman to tell you which way the wind blows... I think sometimes the old method where you'd pick people playground style works almost as well as breaking down the release point of someone's shot. Jerry West did fine picking talent this way, and it looks like reams of crowd sourced material still isn't outsmarting the old fox.
I guess my point is that while I enjoy reading these articles... I don't need a scientist telling me the reaction times of Eddie Van Halen's index finger to know he's an incredible guitar player. |
Let's work up from the bottom because there's a lot wrong here: how do you know Eddie Van Halen's an incredible guitar player?
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
noahp45
Star Player
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 6572
Location: Oceanside Ca
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Looking deeper in the Combine, the Lakers scored huge with the 4th pick. They could get Morant,Garland,Barret or Culver Depending on luck.
Any one of those players helps the Lakers get better. And they will be cheaper than some max subpar FA. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sentient Meat
Franchise Player
Joined: 04 Jul 2014
Posts: 12978
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 1:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
https://mobile.twitter.com/wojespn/status/1130896806748020737?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwgr%5E393039363b636f6e74726f6c&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-16104068041540118295.ampproject.net%2F1905140117570%2Fframe.html
If we take the 1st/2nd team rookie squads and compare that to their 2018 rankings, it looks like they did a really good job on their 1st team talent evaluation but wiffed on their 2nd team talent evaluation.
There are quite a few players on the 2nd who are pretty low on their rankings. Shai, Mitchell, Shamet, Sexton, we're all ranked under 15! |
1) Why would anyone project young talent based on a one year snapshot? It's a good sign when guys make the All-Rookie squads, but it's not definitive since it privileges more physically mature and older players as well as inefficiency monsters like Jahlil Okafor and Collin Sexton. I haven't read The Stepien's masthead since its formation, but I'd be surprised if the site's writers weren't making their evaluations and rankings based on more long-term projections of 5 years or more into the future. Kyle Kuzma may be better out of the gate than Lonzo (he really wasn't, but NBA voters thought so), but who do you think will be better at age 25 between the two?
2) It's odd to ding them for having Mitchell Robinson at #19 when he was passed over by the professional talent evaluators until pick #36. It's early on, but they'll likely be right that the Lakers should've drafted him over Moe Wagner at #25. They had Shamet at #24 and he went #26. Shai obviously should've been higher in their rankings than Williams, Melton, and Huerter, but they still had Shai at #15, Williams had the second highest BPM among rookies behind Robinson (small sample size alert), Huerter looked damn solid as a rookie, and Melton has a chance to develop into a useful PatBev type in time after a strong rookie season on defense.
3) Comparisons to the rankings of other draft sites at ESPN/DX, NBADraft.net, SI, The Ringer, BR, etc. would be useful.
4) Lastly, these kinds of assessments really need to be more rigorous and have baseline terminology from which to start. First and foremost, how are we assessing the value of a player? VORP? RAPM? PIPM? All-Star apprarances? What's our timeline for assessment? 3 or 5 or 8 years? What do we value in draft rankings more: getting the big ones right (like having Jokic top-5 in 2014) or getting as many of the "little things" right like having Porzingis over Okafor? We seem to be flying a bit blind here surrounded by a fog of data points. |
The analytics/draft guru community seems to be rather incestuous and they often end up quoting each other. This isn't to say a lot of valuable work is not being done by them, but it reminds me of the film criticism community or even academia, where one flavor of the month gets acknowledged and then confirmation bias takes over where they all come up with the few names who never actually pan out or become overrated.
As I've said before, I'm a novice to this whole process... I studied comparative literature for 7 years so I have some facility in critical thinking at least enough to see that not many called Jokic or Donovan Mitchell and they were all over the place on Trae Young or Doncic.
It doesn't seem to be an exact science... it's seems more akin to meteorology or earthquake science where one can often effectively breakdown during a post mortem why such and such happened but who are much less successful at actually predicting what will occur.
Like the old Bob Dylan line about how you don't need a weatherman to tell you which way the wind blows... I think sometimes the old method where you'd pick people playground style works almost as well as breaking down the release point of someone's shot. Jerry West did fine picking talent this way, and it looks like reams of crowd sourced material still isn't outsmarting the old fox.
I guess my point is that while I enjoy reading these articles... I don't need a scientist telling me the reaction times of Eddie Van Halen's index finger to know he's an incredible guitar player. |
Let's work up from the bottom because there's a lot wrong here: how do you know Eddie Van Halen's an incredible guitar player? |
Because I played three instruments as a child and I understand enough about the instrument to appreciate what a good player sounds like? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
30
Star Player
Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Posts: 4985
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 1:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'll dedicate time to more thorough write-ups on these guys closer to the draft, but here are my "disappointing 2018 class wing rankings:"
KPJ - a really dumb basketball player with prototype physical tools and a functional step-back he uses like a pre-programmed robot. His basketball stupidity really limits the impact of his athleticism, but maybe the Nets or Spurs will draft him and coach him up.
Tyler Herro - an odd shooting profile makes him confusing and intriguing: elite FT shooter, damn good to great shooting 3s off the bounce, and meh as a C&S/movement shooter. Is the latter noise or a deeper issue related to physical limitations? He shows signs of being a pest in passing lanes and enough functional handle and passing vision to be somewhat of a threat against closeouts, but with a -3 wingspan at his height and weight he's going to have to be a nominal PG, which is...yikes. There's a chance he's a special shooter, but I'd bet on him more as a bench gunner.
Cam Reddish - a mediocre burst athlete with good measurables who lacks the requisite ball skills to compensate for being so stiff and heavy-legged. A 3&D-ish prospect, though his jumper is a bit low despite his quick release, and nothing in his profile points to a special shooter. Prone to disappearing for long stretches; motor questions. Would he be better as a situational PF?
Romeo Langford - I think he has an argument to be considered the best of this lot with solid size and a pathway to being a useful tertiary initiator who's a net positive on defense, but will he ever shoot? The FT% wasn't terrible and he has natural touch around the rim, but the guy's flick wrist form and career results to date are deeply troubling. Has some natural feel and awareness, but is very prone to falling asleep when the ball isn't in front of him. The team that can get him focused and fix his jumper could develop a gem. Or he could be out of the league in four years.
Nassir Little - a reputedly wonderful and intelligent person off the court, Little may actually be dumber than KPJ on the court. There's theoretically a functional corner 3pt shooter/transition finisher/man defender in Little, and maybe you can lie to yourself about Roy Williams holding him back, but the kid has terrible awareness and feel on both ends that I think keep him from ever being an NBA starter. He was arguably the 8th best player on the Tar Heels this year - that's just depressing.
I'm too bummed out thinking about Little to finish wroting about Dort, King, and Keldon Johnson right now. Second installment coming soon.
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Fri May 24, 2019 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | PHILosopher wrote: | | Sentient Meat wrote: | | Baron Von Humongous wrote: |
My main takeaway is that Carsen Edwards in the 20s or Ponds in the 2nd round seem to represent more value than White or Garland in the top 10 unless you think one of them will make a sizeable jump as a passer (maybe Garland given the small sample size and much worse teammates). I think a reasonable median projection for both guys is 6th man scoring guard. |
Using the Stepien's last season projections... how would you rank them vs. their rookie seasons?
https://www.thestepien.com/2018-draft-rankings/
Meaning... don't you think they were hit and miss as anyone else?
Don't get me wrong... their analysis seemed solid... but the fact remains is their ranking differed from the reality. |
The only obvious mistake I can see in the 2018 rankings is SGA at #15. |
Should Sexton be at #20? Should Robert Williams be ahead of Mitchell Robinson
Should Melton be ahead of Huerter?
My point was that it's roughly correct... but there are a lot of calls that could go a different route.
That's why I asked Baron what his actual ranking was.
If we all wrote our top 20... even those of us like myself who don't follow the college game seriously... we'd come up with a lot of the same names.
The trick is parsing the precise choice at 4. Not sure they nailed the order even though they provide useful information. |
https://mobile.twitter.com/wojespn/status/1130896806748020737?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwgr%5E393039363b636f6e74726f6c&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-16104068041540118295.ampproject.net%2F1905140117570%2Fframe.html
If we take the 1st/2nd team rookie squads and compare that to their 2018 rankings, it looks like they did a really good job on their 1st team talent evaluation but wiffed on their 2nd team talent evaluation.
There are quite a few players on the 2nd who are pretty low on their rankings. Shai, Mitchell, Shamet, Sexton, we're all ranked under 15! |
1) Why would anyone project young talent based on a one year snapshot? It's a good sign when guys make the All-Rookie squads, but it's not definitive since it privileges more physically mature and older players as well as inefficiency monsters like Jahlil Okafor and Collin Sexton. I haven't read The Stepien's masthead since its formation, but I'd be surprised if the site's writers weren't making their evaluations and rankings based on more long-term projections of 5 years or more into the future. Kyle Kuzma may be better out of the gate than Lonzo (he really wasn't, but NBA voters thought so), but who do you think will be better at age 25 between the two?
2) It's odd to ding them for having Mitchell Robinson at #19 when he was passed over by the professional talent evaluators until pick #36. It's early on, but they'll likely be right that the Lakers should've drafted him over Moe Wagner at #25. They had Shamet at #24 and he went #26. Shai obviously should've been higher in their rankings than Williams, Melton, and Huerter, but they still had Shai at #15, Williams had the second highest BPM among rookies behind Robinson (small sample size alert), Huerter looked damn solid as a rookie, and Melton has a chance to develop into a useful PatBev type in time after a strong rookie season on defense.
3) Comparisons to the rankings of other draft sites at ESPN/DX, NBADraft.net, SI, The Ringer, BR, etc. would be useful.
4) Lastly, these kinds of assessments really need to be more rigorous and have baseline terminology from which to start. First and foremost, how are we assessing the value of a player? VORP? RAPM? PIPM? All-Star apprarances? What's our timeline for assessment? 3 or 5 or 8 years? What do we value in draft rankings more: getting the big ones right (like having Jokic top-5 in 2014) or getting as many of the "little things" right like having Porzingis over Okafor? We seem to be flying a bit blind here surrounded by a fog of data points. |
The analytics/draft guru community seems to be rather incestuous and they often end up quoting each other. This isn't to say a lot of valuable work is not being done by them, but it reminds me of the film criticism community or even academia, where one flavor of the month gets acknowledged and then confirmation bias takes over where they all come up with the few names who never actually pan out or become overrated.
As I've said before, I'm a novice to this whole process... I studied comparative literature for 7 years so I have some facility in critical thinking at least enough to see that not many called Jokic or Donovan Mitchell and they were all over the place on Trae Young or Doncic.
It doesn't seem to be an exact science... it's seems more akin to meteorology or earthquake science where one can often effectively breakdown during a post mortem why such and such happened but who are much less successful at actually predicting what will occur.
Like the old Bob Dylan line about how you don't need a weatherman to tell you which way the wind blows... I think sometimes the old method where you'd pick people playground style works almost as well as breaking down the release point of someone's shot. Jerry West did fine picking talent this way, and it looks like reams of crowd sourced material still isn't outsmarting the old fox.
I guess my point is that while I enjoy reading these articles... I don't need a scientist telling me the reaction times of Eddie Van Halen's index finger to know he's an incredible guitar player. |
Let's work up from the bottom because there's a lot wrong here: how do you know Eddie Van Halen's an incredible guitar player? |
Because I played three instruments as a child and I understand enough about the instrument to appreciate what a good player sounds like? |
So you have a degree of technical expertise that helps you understand what EVH is doing and why it sounds better than other guitarists? You've put in the work learning music, listening to music, and practicing three instruments over several years so given some money and time you could provide me in written form an informed opinion about the style and quality of his guitar playing - basically, an article about how you've concluded that EVH is an incredible guitar player.
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
