Draft Comparison by Numbers

With just over 24 hours left until the 2010 NBA Draft, scouting reports, opinions, analysis and comparisons are flying around at a fevered pace. The culmination of two and a half months worth of anticpation for many NBA fans, there is a huge mass of information and discussion available about each player, their strengths, weaknesses and potential. One of the most frustrating components of this coverage for me is the comparison of draft prospects to current NBA players. As the easiest way for casual fans and analysts to contribute, these can make up the bulk of discussion on many media outlets (I’m looking at you sports talk radio.) I don’t have a problem with these comparisons in theory, I have a problem with the criteria used to make the comparisons.

For years, every guard with exceptional leaping ability was potentially the next Michael Jordan. Every long white player who can shoot is the next Larry Bird, Keith Van Horn or Adam Morrison; depending on the era. Although, in some parts of Rhode Island they’re referred to as the second coming of Austin Croshere. Every point guard from Gonzaga is the next John Stockton, every huge, awkward center is the next Greg Ostertag and every shot-blocking center with African roots is the next Dikembe Mutombo. These comparisons, based on skin color, position, the college they attended or one singular attribute do a diservice to the players and fans alike.

I began this project almost two months ago, with the idea of creating a system for comparing draft prospects to current NBA players, based on statistical outputs alone. With limited math and statistics skills it was a serious undertaking, and I have arrived at a system with some serious flaws. We’ll address the flaws in a moment, let me start by explaining what I’ve done.

My goal was to create a database whereby I could plug in a statistical profile for a draft prospect and return the statistical profile for the past draftee who’s profile is most similar, in addition I was hoping to find a way to create a numeric representation of how similar their profiles were. In this way you could make accurate comparisons without any subjective opinions. I understand that this project is an over-reaction in the other direction, and that potential and subjective opinions are invaluable tools for making personnel decisions. I just wanted to remind everyone that there are other tools being largely ignored by the casual fan and analyst.

I started by selecting 27 statistical categories which I thought I would offer a semi-complete profile of a player’s skills and abilities. Some of these categories were simple statistical production (Ast/40), some were ratios designed to help inform a player’s tendencies (3PA/FGA). I was somewhat limited in what stats I could use because I needed ones that I could find for college players over the last decade for comparison. For example, I would have liked to use Rebound Rates, but couldn’t find those numbers for college seasons before 2004. The complete list of categories I decided on is below:

1. Height
2. Weight
3. Minutes per Game
4. Points per 40 minutes
5. Rebounds per 40 minutes
6. Offensive Rebounds per 40 minutes
7. Defensive Rebounds per 40 minutes
8. Assists per 40 minutes
9. Steals per 40 minutes
10. Blocks per 40 minutes
11. Turnovers per 40 minutes
12. Personal Fouls per 40 minutes
13. 2PT Field Goal Percentage
14. 3PT Field Goal Percentage
15. Free Throw Percentage
16. Effective Field Goal Percentage
17. True Shooting Percentage
18. Free Throw Attempts per 40 minutes
19. 3PT Attempts per Field Goal Attempt
20. Assists per Field Goal Attempt
21. Assist to Turnover Ratio
22. Pure Point Rating
23. Percentage of Team’s Possessions Used
24. Points per Possession
25. Field Goal Attempts per Possession
26. Turnovers per Possession
27. Player Efficiency Rating (PER)

Once I had the categories for a statistical profile, I put together the database for comparison, including every player drafted in the 1st Round since the 2001 NBA Draft. Subtracting high schoolers and foreign players, this left me with 171 players for comparison. Adding the top 40 college players available in this year’s draft (I used Draftexpress.com’s mock draft as a reference.) The next step was to calculate the average and standard deviation for each statistical category in the database. With that information I could standardize the individual values for each player in each category. Adding those standardized values together then gives us a single numeric value for each player’s statistical profile which can be used for comparison.

Now the sum of these standardized values is not a measure of a player’s worth. Some the values you see below are negatives, as for certain categories it would be better to below average, turnovers for example. By comparing these sums I was able to find the previous college player with the most similar statistical profile to each of the 40 players available in this draft. The results are below with the sum of the standardized values for each player in paraentheses. After the tables we can talk about some of the flaws.
 

1. John Wall (0.2779) – Jerryd Bayless (0.2166)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
John Wall	PG	76.0	196.0	34.8	19.1	4.9	0.9	4.0	7.5	2.0	0.6	4.6	2.2	50.9	32.5	75.4	50.0	56.0	7.2	0.26	0.55	1.62	0.78	23.4	1.01	0.72	0.24	22.2
Jerryd Bayless	PG/SG	75.0	204.0	35.7	22.1	3.1	0.5	2.6	4.5	1.1	0.1	3.3	2.5	48.9	40.7	83.9	54.0	61.0	8.3	0.38	0.32	1.36	-0.85	25.3	1.19	0.76	0.18	23.7

2. Evan Turner (12.4739) – George Hill (12.9405)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Evan Turner	SG	79.0	214.0	35.8	22.8	10.2	2.2	8.0	6.7	1.9	1.0	4.9	3.1	54.0	36.4	75.8	54.0	58.0	6.6	0.12	0.40	1.36	-1.25	29.6	1.05	0.76	0.23	30.4
George Hill	PG/SG	74.5	181.0	36.8	23.3	7.3	1.7	5.7	4.6	1.9	0.4	3.2	3.0	58.0	45.0	81.2	61.0	66.0	8.3	0.27	0.34	1.46	-0.30	26.5	1.26	0.74	0.17	32.4

3. Derrick Favors (1.2534) – Al Horford (1.2752)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Derrick Favors	PF	82.0	245.0	27.5	18.1	12.3	4.4	7.9	1.5	1.3	3.0	3.6	3.8	61.3	–	62.9	61.0	62.0	5.8	0.00	0.13	0.41	-6.63	15.9	1.11	0.72	0.22	24.8
Al Horford	PF	82.0	246.0	27.8	19.0	13.6	3.6	10.0	3.1	1.1	2.6	2.6	3.6	61.4	0.0	64.4	61.0	63.0	7.6	0.01	0.27	1.21	-1.31	16.3	1.20	0.73	0.16	30.2

4. DeMarcus Cousins (10.0594) – Jason Thompson (10.4672)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
DeMarcus Cousins	PF/C	83.0	292.0	23.5	25.8	16.8	6.9	9.9	1.7	1.7	3.0	3.5	5.5	56.5	16.7	60.4	56.0	58.0	12.0	0.02	0.10	0.59	-5.93	18.8	1.14	0.73	0.15	34.4
Jason Thompson	PF/C	83.0	250.0	34.6	23.6	14.0	3.9	10.1	3.2	1.2	3.1	3.4	3.4	57.8	32.4	58.1	57.0	58.0	7.8	0.07	0.19	0.94	-3.20	25.6	1.13	0.80	0.16	31.4

5. Wesley Johnson (2.6055) – Luther Head (2.5294)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Wesley Johnson	SG/SF	79.0	206.0	35.0	18.9	9.8	2.5	7.3	2.5	1.9	2.1	2.6	2.4	54.0	41.5	77.2	56.0	60.0	4.7	0.30	0.19	0.96	-2.41	19.7	1.18	0.84	0.17	25.4
Luther Head	SG	75.0	179.0	33.3	19.2	4.8	0.7	4.0	4.6	2.1	0.3	2.1	1.7	54.7	41.0	78.8	59.0	61.0	3.1	0.61	0.32	2.17	2.31	19.1	1.27	0.94	0.14	25.5

6. Greg Monroe (5.3338) – Chris Bosh (5.7637)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Greg Monroe	PF/C	83.0	247.0	34.2	18.9	11.3	2.5	8.7	4.4	1.4	1.8	3.8	3.0	54.5	25.9	66.0	58.0	61.0	7.2	0.07	0.33	1.14	-2.36	23.1	1.05	0.73	0.21	25.9
Chris Bosh	PF	83.0	225.0	31.0	19.5	11.2	3.8	7.3	1.5	1.2	2.6	2.9	2.9	57.6	46.8	73.0	60.0	63.0	7.0	0.16	0.13	0.53	-4.89	18.3	1.21	0.75	0.18	27.6

7. Al-Farouq Aminu (-3.3085) –  Spencer Hawes (-3.3208)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Al-Farouq Aminu	SF/PF	80.5	216.0	31.3	20.2	13.7	5.5	8.2	1.7	1.8	1.8	4.1	3.8	48.4	27.3	69.8	47.0	53.0	8.2	0.18	0.11	0.41	-7.42	21.9	1.00	0.76	0.20	23.6
Spencer Hawes	C	85.0	244.0	28.9	20.6	8.8	2.7	6.1	2.7	0.7	2.4	3.5	3.1	53.3	33.3	75.5	53.0	56.0	4.4	0.01	0.17	0.77	-4.29	19.4	1.08	0.85	0.18	22.8

8. Xavier Henry (-4.4071) – Tayshaun Prince (-4.4495)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Xavier Henry	SG/SF	78.5	210.0	27.5	19.5	6.3	1.7	4.6	2.1	2.2	0.7	2.8	2.7	49.2	41.8	78.3	56.0	59.0	4.6	0.47	0.15	0.77	-3.44	16.3	1.18	0.86	0.17	21.9
Tayshaun Prince	SF	81.0	215.0	34.0	20.5	7.4	2.4	4.9	1.9	1.2	1.6	2.3	1.9	56.4	34.0	70.3	54.0	56.0	4.3	0.43	0.12	0.81	-2.79	20.7	1.18	0.93	0.13	23.4

9. Ed Davis (-1.3980) – Jason Maxiell (-1.5073)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Ed Davis	PF	82.0	227.0	26.9	19.2	13.6	4.1	9.6	1.4	0.6	4.0	2.9	2.6	57.8	–	65.9	58.0	61.0	8.2	0.00	0.11	0.48	-4.88	15.2	1.16	0.72	0.17	26.8
Jason Maxiell	PF	78.0	258.0	31.4	19.5	9.8	4.1	5.7	1.1	1.3	3.5	2.5	3.2	54.5	40.0	64.5	55.0	59.0	10.2	0.02	0.09	0.44	-4.39	18.8	1.17	0.70	0.15	26.3

10. Ekpe Udoh (-2.8560) – Brandan Wright (-2.2947)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Ekpe Udoh	PF/C	82.0	237.0	35.1	15.8	11.1	4.1	7.0	3.9	0.9	4.2	2.8	2.8	50.5	26.9	68.5	50.0	54.0	5.1	0.07	0.25	1.11	-1.82	19.7	1.04	0.81	0.18	25.1
Brandan Wright	PF	82.0	200.0	27.4	21.5	9.0	3.0	6.0	1.5	1.4	2.6	2.3	2.2	64.6	–	56.7	65.0	64.0	6.2	0.00	0.10	0.63	-3.41	15.8	1.26	0.81	0.14	27.0

11. Patrick Patterson (-2.5771) – Jared Jeffries (-3.0796)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Patrick Patterson	PF	81.0	240.0	33.0	17.3	9.0	3.7	5.3	1.1	0.9	1.6	1.3	1.9	62.6	34.8	69.2	61.0	63.0	4.1	0.18	0.10	0.88	-1.37	15.6	1.30	0.89	0.10	24.0
Jared Jeffries	SF/PF	82.0	215.0	32.6	19.4	9.8	3.3	6.6	2.7	1.9	1.7	3.7	3.2	47.2	38.0	66.7	49.0	53.0	7.2	0.17	0.18	0.73	-4.52	22.1	1.03	0.79	0.20	22.7

12. Luke Babbitt (6.2743) – Troy Bell (6.2797)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Luke Babbitt	SF	81.0	218.0	37.1	23.6	9.6	2.2	7.4	2.3	1.1	0.9	2.6	2.8	52.1	41.6	91.7	54.0	62.0	6.9	0.20	0.14	0.89	-2.66	25.0	1.24	0.84	0.13	27.6
Troy Bell	PG/SG	74.0	178.0	38.6	26.1	4.7	1.6	3.1	3.8	2.3	0.2	2.6	2.2	48.4	40.2	84.7	55.0	62.0	8.9	0.52	0.23	1.46	-0.26	27.7	1.28	0.83	0.13	29.5

13. Avery Bradley (-20.2629) – Demar Derozan (-15.7546)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Avery Bradley	SG	75.0	180.0	29.5	15.8	3.9	1.3	2.6	2.8	1.8	0.7	2.1	3.2	45.7	37.5	54.5	49.0	50.0	2.6	0.30	0.19	1.37	-0.51	14.9	1.05	0.97	0.14	14.5
Demar Derozan	SG	78.5	211.0	33.4	16.6	6.9	2.9	4.0	1.7	1.1	0.4	2.5	2.5	56.2	16.7	64.6	53.0	56.0	5.0	0.10	0.14	0.70	-3.37	19.4	1.09	0.83	0.16	19.3

14. Cole Aldrich (1.1862) – Charlie Villanueva (1.1378)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Cole Aldrich	C	83.0	236.0	26.8	16.9	14.7	4.6	10.1	1.3	1.1	5.2	2.3	3.8	56.2	–	67.9	56.0	60.0	6.6	0.00	0.12	0.55	-3.69	13.9	1.16	0.76	0.16	28.7
Charlie Villanueva	PF	81.0	237.0	25.8	21.1	12.9	4.1	8.8	2.0	1.0	2.9	3.5	3.4	52.2	50.0	68.8	53.0	57.0	6.7	0.04	0.13	0.57	-5.46	17.3	1.09	0.79	0.18	25.9

15. Gordon Hayward (-2.7436) – Jared Jeffries (-3.0796)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Gordon Hayward	SF	80.0	211.0	33.5	18.5	9.8	2.3	7.5	2.0	1.3	1.0	2.9	2.6	59.2	29.4	82.9	53.0	50.0	7.0	0.43	0.17	0.73	-3.56	20.6	1.17	0.76	0.17	24.9
Jared Jeffries	SF/PF	82.0	215.0	32.6	19.4	9.8	3.3	6.6	2.7	1.9	1.7	3.7	3.2	47.2	38.0	66.7	49.0	53.0	7.2	0.17	0.18	0.73	-4.52	22.1	1.03	0.79	0.20	22.7

16. Larry Sanders (-0.6325) – Hakim Warrick (-0.9993)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Larry Sanders	PF	82.5	222.0	26.9	21.4	13.6	4.5	9.1	1.4	1.1	3.8	2.5	4.4	54.7	25.0	64.1	54.0	56.0	7.1	0.04	0.09	0.59	-3.78	18.4	1.15	0.84	0.13	30.0
Hakim Warrick	PF	80.5	215.0	37.5	22.8	9.2	3.3	5.9	1.6	1.0	0.8	2.7	2.5	56.6	29.0	68.1	56.0	60.0	9.7	0.07	0.11	0.58	-4.16	26.4	1.19	0.76	0.14	26.9

17. Paul George (5.6852) – Al Thornton (5.4371)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Paul George	SG/SF	81.0	214.0	33.2	20.2	8.7	2.3	6.4	3.7	2.7	1.0	3.9	3.5	48.5	35.3	90.9	51.0	57.0	5.5	0.46	0.24	0.94	-3.73	23.1	1.09	0.81	0.21	25.4
Al Thornton	SF	79.0	221.0	31.2	25.3	9.2	3.9	5.3	0.9	1.9	1.5	3.2	3.5	54.9	44.4	79.0	57.0	62.0	7.7	0.18	0.05	0.28	-6.52	23.7	1.22	0.81	0.15	30.0

18. Eric Bledsoe (-11.6073) – Daequan Cook (-10.7018)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Eric Bledsoe	PG/SG	73.5	182.0	30.3	14.9	4.1	0.7	3.4	3.8	1.9	0.4	4.0	2.9	51.6	38.3	66.7	54.0	57.0	4.4	0.41	0.34	0.96	-3.69	16.1	1.00	0.74	0.27	14.4
Daequan Cook	SG	78.0	203.0	19.7	19.8	8.7	1.5	7.2	2.1	1.5	0.5	2.9	3.4	46.5	41.5	69.7	53.0	55.0	3.4	0.41	0.13	0.71	-3.84	13.3	1.12	0.93	0.16	21.2

19. Solomon Alabi (-4.9582) – Marcus Haislip (-5.5872)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Solomon Alabi	C	85.0	237.0	25.6	18.2	9.7	3.9	5.8	0.8	1.0	3.7	3.0	3.7	53.4	–	79.4	53.0	60.0	6.6	0.00	0.06	0.26	-6.15	15.3	1.13	0.75	0.18	24.6
Marcus Haislip	PF	82.0	221.0	33.5	19.8	7.9	2.7	5.3	1.1	0.5	2.1	2.4	4.1	55.1	32.6	72.1	54.0	57.0	5.3	0.15	0.08	0.47	-4.20	20.5	1.16	0.87	0.14	21.6

20. Damion James (4.3035) – Tyler Hansbrough (4.2418)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Damion James	SF/PF	80.0	227.0	30.3	23.8	13.6	4.2	9.4	1.3	2.2	1.6	2.7	3.9	53.5	38.3	67.4	54.0	58.0	8.1	0.22	0.08	0.48	-4.59	20.4	1.18	0.81	0.13	28.6
Tyler Hansbrough	PF	81.5	234.0	30.3	27.4	10.7	4.0	6.7	1.3	1.6	0.5	2.4	3.0	52.1	39.1	84.1	52.0	61.0	11.5	0.05	0.08	0.54	-3.94	21.7	1.26	0.78	0.11	30.4

21. Daniel Orton (-20.1845) – Chris Wilcox (-15.6641)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Daniel Orton	C	81.5	269.0	13.2	10.3	10.0	3.6	6.5	1.2	1.7	4.2	3.0	7.0	53.9	0.0	52.4	53.0	53.0	5.0	0.02	0.16	0.39	-5.60	5.2	0.92	0.65	0.27	15.8
Chris Wilcox	PF	82.0	218.0	24.1	18.4	11.0	4.1	6.8	2.3	1.2	2.3	2.3	4.1	50.6	0.0	58.5	50.0	52.0	6.3	0.01	0.15	1.00	-2.08	14.6	1.08	0.86	0.13	23.7

22. Hassan Whiteside (3.5234) – Demarre Carroll (3.5869)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Hassan Whiteside	PF/C	83.5	227.0	26.1	20.1	13.6	4.1	9.5	0.4	0.9	8.2	2.9	3.7	52.2	60.0	58.8	53.0	55.0	8.4	0.02	0.03	0.16	-6.46	16.9	1.09	0.78	0.16	29.8
Demarre Carroll	SF	80.0	207.0	28.0	23.6	10.3	3.5	6.8	3.1	2.2	0.9	2.1	3.2	57.9	36.4	63.4	58.0	59.0	7.2	0.10	0.19	1.46	-0.18	18.6	1.23	0.86	0.11	30.3

23. Dominique Jones (1.6883) – Marcus Williams (1.6426)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Dominique Jones	SG	77.0	216.0	37.1	23.0	6.6	1.2	5.4	3.9	1.8	0.6	3.2	3.0	52.1	31.1	74.1	50.0	56.0	9.2	0.34	0.24	1.24	-1.45	28.8	1.13	0.79	0.16	26.3
Marcus Williams	PG	75.0	215.0	33.3	14.8	4.6	0.9	3.7	10.3	1.1	0.3	4.4	2.0	41.0	40.0	86.2	47.0	56.0	5.7	0.29	0.97	2.33	5.96	17.9	0.96	0.69	0.29	19.3

24. Elliot Williams (-1.0605) – Kirk Snyder (-1.0392)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Elliot Williams	PG/SG	76.0	175.0	33.3	21.5	4.8	0.9	3.9	4.5	1.6	0.1	3.5	2.4	52.7	36.6	75.8	54.0	60.0	9.0	0.42	0.33	1.28	-1.37	23.3	1.15	0.73	0.19	23.8
Kirk Snyder	SG	79.0	228.0	31.7	23.7	7.2	2.4	4.8	4.3	1.3	0.8	4.4	2.7	47.0	34.8	73.1	49.0	54.0	8.2	0.32	0.24	0.98	-3.87	25.6	1.05	0.80	0.20	23.4

25. Craig Brackins (-9.8072) – Darrell Arthur (-9.2456)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Craig Brackins	PF	82.0	229.0	35.1	18.8	9.7	2.4	7.3	2.5	0.9	1.4	2.4	2.3	44.6	31.0	76.0	45.0	50.0	5.5	0.19	0.15	1.01	-2.00	22.4	1.05	0.91	0.13	20.3
Darrell Arthur	PF	80.5	216.0	24.7	20.6	10.1	3.7	6.4	1.3	0.8	2.1	3.0	4.8	55.5	16.7	70.2	55.0	57.0	4.6	0.03	0.08	0.44	-5.38	16.6	1.11	0.86	0.16	23.5

26. Greivis Vasquez (5.5496) – Josh Childress (5.3564)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Greivis Vasquez	PG/SG	78.5	211.0	33.9	23.1	5.5	1.4	4.1	7.4	2.0	0.4	4.0	2.5	47.0	35.9	85.7	50.0	55.0	5.8	0.37	0.41	1.87	2.35	25.7	1.08	0.85	0.18	25.8
Josh Childress	SF	79.0	196.0	29.8	21.0	10.1	2.6	7.5	3.6	1.2	2.2	3.0	3.2	53.6	39.5	82.1	56.0	60.0	5.5	0.34	0.24	1.20	-1.57	19.5	1.19	0.84	0.17	28.5

27. Armon Johnson (-9.8069) – Jordan Farmar (-9.7921)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Armon Johnson	PG	75.0	195.0	34.5	18.3	3.9	0.9	3.0	6.5	1.0	0.4	3.9	2.1	54.4	23.9	67.8	51.0	54.0	4.0	0.16	0.43	1.66	0.92	22.2	1.00	0.83	0.21	18.4
Jordan Farmar	PG	74.0	171.0	30.4	17.7	3.4	0.7	2.6	6.7	1.5	0.3	4.8	2.2	47.2	33.3	71.7	48.0	52.0	4.5	0.45	0.45	1.40	-0.91	22.3	0.95	0.80	0.26	17.9

28. James Anderson (5.1228) – Quincy Douby (5.2268)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
James Anderson	SG/SF	78.0	208.0	34.1	26.2	6.8	2.3	4.6	2.8	1.6	0.7	2.8	3.1	54.9	34.1	81.0	53.0	60.0	9.2	0.44	0.16	1.03	-2.24	26.3	1.23	0.83	0.13	29.1
Quincy Douby	SG	75.0	175.0	36.7	27.7	4.7	0.9	3.8	3.4	1.9	0.9	3.0	2.0	51.5	40.1	84.7	56.0	60.0	5.8	0.47	0.17	1.12	-1.98	31.3	1.24	0.92	0.14	30.7

29. Stanley Robinson (-9.1744) – Wilson Chandler (-10.0241)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Stanley Robinson	SF/PF	80.0	213.0	34.2	17.0	8.9	3.1	5.8	1.2	1.0	1.4	2.6	1.8	57.1	34.2	62.9	56.0	57.0	3.3	0.20	0.09	0.44	-4.69	19.2	1.11	0.87	0.17	20.7
Wilson Chandler	SF	80.0	210.0	31.7	18.4	8.7	2.3	6.4	1.8	0.8	1.7	2.0	3.6	49.4	33.3	65.4	50.0	52.0	4.0	0.27	0.11	0.87	-2.16	20.8	1.10	0.96	0.12	21.6

30. Terrico White (-14.1043) – Demar Derozan (-15.7564)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Terrico White	PG/SG	77.0	203.0	31.5	19.3	5.8	2.0	3.8	1.9	1.1	0.3	1.7	2.3	48.7	34.3	71.4	50.0	53.0	4.3	0.40	0.12	1.11	-1.15	18.5	1.15	0.97	0.10	18.7
Demar Derozan	SG	78.5	211.0	33.4	16.6	6.9	2.9	4.0	1.7	1.1	0.4	2.5	2.5	56.2	16.7	64.6	53.0	56.0	5.0	0.10	0.14	0.70	-3.37	19.4	1.09	0.83	0.16	19.3

31. Willie Warren (-4.4783) – Frank Williams (-4.4793)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Willie Warren	SG	76.0	208.0	32.3	20.2	4.1	0.8	3.2	5.1	1.2	0.1	4.7	2.8	52.4	30.9	79.5	50.0	57.0	7.5	0.40	0.36	1.08	-3.43	23.1	1.03	0.73	0.24	18.6
Frank Williams	PG	75.0	212.0	32.5	19.8	5.7	1.1	4.6	5.3	2.5	0.3	3.4	2.5	42.3	34.0	80.8	45.0	53.0	7.1	0.36	0.35	1.59	0.44	21.8	1.06	0.83	0.18	22.5

32. Quincy Pondexter (2.2165) – Antoine Wright (2.2119)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Quincy Pondexter	SF	78.0	220.0	32.3	23.9	9.1	3.7	5.4	2.2	1.6	0.7	2.3	3.1	55.0	35.3	82.7	55.0	61.0	7.8	0.11	0.14	0.93	-2.27	21.4	1.24	0.83	0.12	28.2
Antoine Wright	SG/SF	78.0	203.0	33.9	21.0	7.0	1.9	5.1	2.6	1.4	0.8	2.9	3.0	54.0	44.7	69.1	59.0	61.0	5.4	0.41	0.18	0.92	-2.80	22.0	1.22	0.85	0.17	24.7

33. Darrington Hobson (-1.7650) – Aaron Brooks (-1.7392)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Darrington Hobson	SF	78.5	204.0	33.6	18.9	11.1	2.6	8.5	5.4	1.5	0.5	3.5	2.3	46.5	36.1	65.3	48.0	52.0	6.8	0.25	0.36	1.54	0.14	22.9	1.02	0.80	0.19	24.0
Aaron Brooks	PG	72.0	161.0	36.8	19.3	4.6	1.0	3.7	4.6	1.5	0.2	2.8	2.7	50.2	40.4	84.6	55.0	59.0	4.2	0.43	0.32	1.67	0.72	22.5	1.17	0.88	0.17	22.2

34. Devin Ebanks (-15.6870) – Demar Derozan (-15.7654)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Devin Ebanks	SF	80.0	208.0	34.1	14.1	9.5	3.4	6.1	2.9	1.2	0.8	2.6	1.9	49.5	10.0	77.0	46.0	53.0	5.2	0.10	0.26	1.11	-1.74	18.1	1.02	0.79	0.19	20.3
Demar Derozan	SG	78.5	211.0	33.4	16.6	6.9	2.9	4.0	1.7	1.1	0.4	2.5	2.5	56.2	16.7	64.6	53.0	56.0	5.0	0.10	0.14	0.70	-3.37	19.4	1.09	0.83	0.16	19.3

35. Gani Lawal (-8.6004) – Darrell Arthur (-9.2456)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Gani Lawal	PF	81.0	233.0	25.8	20.3	13.1	4.5	8.6	0.6	0.7	2.1	3.4	3.3	53.1	–	57.2	53.0	55.0	9.5	0.00	0.05	0.19	-7.32	17.3	1.06	0.73	0.18	22.9
Darrell Arthur	PF	80.5	216.0	24.7	20.6	10.1	3.7	6.4	1.3	0.8	2.1	3.0	4.8	55.5	16.7	70.2	55.0	57.0	4.6	0.03	0.08	0.44	-5.38	16.6	1.11	0.86	0.16	23.5

36. Jordan Crawford (-2.3259) – Casey Jacobsen (-2.3250)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Jordan Crawford	SG	76.5	198.0	32.8	25.0	5.8	1.2	4.6	3.5	1.6	0.2	3.0	2.0	50.1	39.1	77.3	53.0	57.0	5.4	0.36	0.18	1.19	-1.60	24.6	1.17	0.91	0.14	24.8
Casey Jacobsen	SG/SF	78.0	215.0	35.2	24.0	4.9	1.6	3.3	3.9	0.7	0.1	2.7	2.0	48.1	37.2	77.6	51.0	57.0	8.6	0.37	0.23	1.45	-0.29	25.5	1.19	0.84	0.13	24.2

37. Mikhail Torrance (-0.4767) – Mike Conley (-0.4634)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Mikhail Torrance	PG/SG	76.0	207.0	32.9	19.2	4.6	0.4	4.2	6.2	1.0	0.3	3.3	1.9	52.1	35.8	86.5	53.0	59.0	6.0	0.31	0.47	1.88	2.01	21.0	1.13	0.78	0.19	23.3
Mike Conley	PG	73.0	175.0	31.6	14.3	4.4	0.9	3.5	7.7	2.8	0.3	2.8	1.9	57.9	30.4	69.4	55.0	59.0	4.7	0.22	0.77	2.77	5.77	15.8	1.09	0.76	0.21	24.2

38. Lance Stephenson (-15.6001) – Demar Derozan (-15.7654)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Lance Stephenson	SG	78.0	227.0	28.2	17.5	7.6	2.6	5.0	3.5	1.3	0.3	3.4	2.8	49.5	21.9	66.4	46.0	49.0	5.0	0.20	0.23	1.04	-2.66	18.8	0.97	0.85	0.19	17.7
Demar Derozan	SG	78.5	211.0	33.4	16.6	6.9	2.9	4.0	1.7	1.1	0.4	2.5	2.5	56.2	16.7	64.6	53.0	56.0	5.0	0.10	0.14	0.70	-3.37	19.4	1.09	0.83	0.16	19.3

39. Jarvis Varnado (-0.2561) – Hilton Armstrong (-0.2794)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Jarvis Varnado	PF	82.0	210.0	31.7	17.4	12.9	3.8	9.2	1.1	0.8	6.0	2.5	3.1	58.2	–	61.0	58.0	60.0	7.4	0.00	0.10	0.45	-4.37	17.4	1.15	0.74	0.17	28.6
Hilton Armstrong	PF	82.0	240.0	27.7	14.0	9.6	2.9	6.7	1.1	0.9	4.5	3.3	4.0	60.9	50.0	69.2	61.0	64.0	5.3	0.01	0.13	0.32	-6.42	12.3	1.09	0.64	0.26	19.8

40. Trevor Booker (-4.7462) – Luol Deng (-4.7329)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Trevor Booker	SF	79.5	236.0	30.8	19.8	10.9	3.6	7.3	3.3	1.7	1.8	2.5	2.6	54.7	26.5	59.1	47.0	53.0	7.0	0.09	0.22	1.31	-0.87	19.4	1.11	0.83	0.14	26.7
Luol Deng	SF	80.0	220.0	31.1	19.4	8.9	2.9	6.0	2.4	1.7	1.4	2.9	2.9	51.4	36.0	71.0	52.0	55.0	4.7	0.25	0.15	0.82	-3.32	19.6	1.10	0.87	0.16	23.0

41. Sherron Collins (-6.7597) – T.J. Ford (-6.7383)

	Position	Height	Weight	Min/g	Pts/40	Reb/40	Oreb/40	Dreb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	Blk/40	TO/40	PF/40	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/40	3PA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	PPR	% of Tm Pos.	Pts/Pos.	FGA/Pos	TO/Pos	PER
Sherron Collins	PG	72.0	217.0	33.0	18.8	2.5	0.3	2.3	5.4	1.3	0.1	2.9	2.0	46.9	37.0	85.5	51.0	56.0	4.7	0.44	0.37	1.89	1.79	19.8	1.12	0.87	0.17	19.1
T.J. Ford	PG	72.0	162.0	33.6	17.2	4.5	0.7	3.7	8.0	2.3	0.2	3.7	2.9	42.9	26.5	82.0	42.0	51.0	6.8	0.17	0.64	2.37	5.46	21.8	0.97	0.78	0.21	22.0

Now there are some obvious flaws with my method, as evidenced by the results. Since each of the categories are weighted equally, a close similarity in a subtle category like FGA/POS can make up for a large disparity in a more obvious category like Assists. In addition since my technique is really measuring how far away from average a player is in each of these categories, it doesn’t always lead to statistical profiles that match up perfectly. For example a guard could be above average in all the shooting categories  and come out looking the same as a power forward who is above average in all the rebounding or possession categories. The only subjective piece I had to add was factoring in a position played when a profile was close to two or more profiles.

I am hoping that this is a tool that I can continue to refine for next year’s draft. As this year’s draft classs gets incorporated into the comparison database I will have a larger sample for comparison. In addition if anyone has suggestions on how to improve or simply change my techniques I would love to hear them. Here is the link to the spreadsheet if anyone wants to look at the raw data.

That being said, there were some interesting results. Keep in my mind that this is not meant as a tool to predict future production, just compare what a player has already done. I am not saying that Wesley Johnson will have Luther Head’s career arc, but it is interesting that those two players had such similar profiles. The others that were extremely close were Willie Warren and Frank Williams as well as Antoine Wright and Quincy Pondexter. Remember, I am not advocating using this for any specific purpose, but I thought it would be fun to see. Enjoy!

. . . and other mythical beasts.

             I don’t want it to seem like I am out to singlehandedly destroy Eric Bledsoe’s draft stock . . . but . . . I’m not sure how to finish that sentence. I guess I just don’t want anyone, mostly Larry Legend and the Pacers, fooled into thinking he is the point guard of the future. I summed up my thoughts on Bledsoe playing the point last week. I thought I would add to it a little today. After this I promise to leave him alone . . . unless the Pacers bring him in for a workout.

            I keep hearing that Bledsoe is the best point guard prospect in this draft. However, I always answer that with the fact that he had more turnovers than assists this season. Here is a list of players drafted in the 1st or 2nd round since 2002, who averaged more turnovers than assists their final year in college. I included points guards and shooting guards, because I see Bledsoe’s future at the shooting guard position.

Name	Year	A/TO Ratio
Jodie Meeks	2009	0.66
Jermaine Taylor	2009	0.67
Robert Vaden	2009	0.83
O.J. Mayo	2008	0.93
Eric Gordon	2008	0.64
Courtney Lee	2008	0.89
Sonny Weems	2008	0.93
Chris Douglas-Roberts	2008	0.86
Shan Foster	2008	0.97
Joe Crawford	2008	0.77
Nick Young	2007	0.56
Daequan Cook	2007	0.71
Morris Almond	2007	0.34
Maurice Ager	2006	0.97
James White	2006	0.87
Denham Brown	2006	0.83
Antoine Wright	2005	0.92
Joey Graham	2005	0.76
Salim Stoudamire	2005	0.92
Von Wafer	2005	0.98
Kirk Snyder	2004	0.98
Kevin Martin	2004	0.56
Andre Emmett	2004	0.89
Tim Pickett	2004	0.87
Luis Flores	2004	0.68
Dahntay Jones	2003	0.46
Travis Hansen	2003	0.92
Kareem Rush	2002	0.86
Rod Grizzard	2002	0.76
Tamar Slay	2002	0.82

            Just to be clear, an A/TO ratio of less than 1.00 means the player had more turnovers than assists. Bledsoe’s was 0.96 this season. So does anyone see any productive NBA point guards on that list? Does anyone see even one NBA point guard on this list? Okay, point made (pun intended), I promise I’m done with this topic for awhile.

Unicorns, Dragons, Mermaids and Eric Bledsoe as an NBA Point Guard

           Eric Bledsoe has rocketed up a lot of people’s draft boards with his performance at the end of this year. His projected draft positions vary, but with the Pacers most likely picking in the 10th spot, he is someone they will have to take a look at. He certainly has some positive attributes, but I have seen nothing to indicate he can really be a full-time point guard in the NBA. The major argument in favor of his ability to transition to the point in the NBA, is guys like Russell Westbrook and Rodney Stuckey. These are guys who played primarily off the ball in college and have become, or seemed poised to become, capable professional point guards. For comparison, I put together the college statistics of several players who seem to fit this mold.

Name	Ast/40	Ast/FGA	Ast/Pos	Ast/TO	PPR
Russell Westbrook	6.5	0.43	0.35	1.74	1.08
Rodney Stuckey	6.6	0.32	0.26	1.63	0.79
Nate Robinson	5.8	0.39	0.33	2.24	3.08
Jrue Holiday	5.4	0.52	0.42	1.72	1.07
Stephen Curry (So.)	3.5	0.16	0.15	1.12	-2.04
Stephen Curry (Jr.)	6.6	0.28	0.24	1.50	-0.11
Jeff Teague	4.4	0.30	0.22	1.06	-3.07
Eric Bledsoe	3.6	0.34	0.25	0.96	-3.69

•  The statistics I included represent the largest indicators of success in the traditional “facilitator” or “floor general” role as point guard. From my perspective Ast/FGA and Ast/Pos would be representations of a player’s willingness to share the ball. Ast/40, Ast/TO, and Pure Point Rating would be representations of a player’s success at creating scoring opportunities for his teammates, and getting the ball to his teammates in an efficient way, within those scoring opportunities.
• It is worth noting that the players on this list represent a variety of playing situations, some similar to Bledsoe, some dissimilar.
• In terms of situation, I would start by grouping Westbrook and Holiday together. Both played out of position at the 2-guard spot because they were paired with a terrific point guard (Darren Collison). However, from the 2-guard spot neither was expected to provide much in the way of perimeter scoring. They were both primarily defenders, and secondary penetrators and distributors.
• Stuckey, Teague and Stephen Curry (So. year) all seemed to have come from similar situations. Each played the 2-guard because it was a better fit with their natural skill set. In college they were primarily scorers, providing this from the perimeter, as well as slashing to the basket. Teague and Stuckey have been asked to transition to the point in the pros because of the limitations of their physical profiles. Curry made this same transition, but made it from his sophmore to junior years.
• Stephen Curry’s senior year seems to be a unique case here. In this situation he was asked to be his team’s primary facilitator as well as it’s primary scorer.
• The player who’s college situation seems to most closely resemble Bledsoe is Nate Robinson’s. I have to admit, I was absolutely shocked at how impressive Robinson’s numbers were. They seem to have almost no connection to the prodigious NBA chucker who we have all come to know, and cringe at. Like Bledsoe, Robinson shared his collegiate backcourt with some incredible talents. Bledsoe played the 2 this year to make room for John Wall. Robinson shared a backcourt with Brandon Roy and Will Conroy. Bledsoe and Robinson were each asked to defend and provide perimeter scoring. They did not spend nearly as much time running their team’s offense as their backcourt teammates.
• The clear (at least to me) result of these numbers, is that from a statistical standpoint,  Bledsoe does not belong with these other players. His willingness to pass is comparable, but the effectiveness of his passing doesn’t even come close. It is also worth noting that he is the only one in the group that had more turnovers than assists in his last year in college. I am not saying there isn’t room for growth, but if we are going to compare him to these other players we need to acknowledge how much farther away his starting point is from their’s.

           After lining up the stats between Bledsoe, and the players he is most often compared to, it is clear there are some significant differences. Next I set out to find some players whose statistics more closely resembled Bledsoe’s. Going back to the 2000/2001 season, these are the players whose numbers seem the most similar to me:

Name	Year	Ast/40	Ast/FGA	Ast/Pos	Ast/TO	PPR
Eric Bledsoe	09-10	3.6	0.34	0.25	0.96	-3.69
Ronnie Price	04-05	3.2	0.16	0.14	0.99	-2.84
Von Wafer	04-05	2.5	0.17	0.16	0.98	-2.28
Maurice Ager	05-06	2.9	0.17	0.15	0.97	-2.70
Kirk Snyder	03-04	4.3	0.24	0.19	0.98	-3.87
Wes Matthews	05-06	2.9	0.31	0.24	0.98	-3.20
Marcus Banks	01-02	3.7	0.28	0.20	0.95	-3.67
Shannon Brown	04-05	3.1	0.20	0.16	0.95	-2.70
O.J. Mayo	07-08	3.6	0.20	0.18	0.93	-3.71

• I included O.J. Mayo, specifically, so I can’t be accused of saying that Eric Bledsoe doesn’t have the potential to be a tremendous player. What I think is clear from the statistical comparison is he hasn’t demonstrated the potential to be an effective NBA point guard. The players whose numbers he most closely resembles would be Wesley Matthews and Marcus Banks. Matthews has found a place on the Jazz and has been an effective contributer at the 2-guard. Banks has been buried on a variety of NBA benches since entering the league. One isn’t playing minutes at the point, the other isn’t playing at all.

             I have also heard a lot of comparisons to Rajon Rondo. I am assuming these comparisons are based on similar physical profiles and the fact that both players attended Kentucky. I am assuming this because they have very little in common statistically:

Name	Pts/40	Reb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	eFG%	PER	3ptA/FGA	Ast/FGA	Ast/POS	Ast/TO	PPR
Rajon Rondo	14.4	7.9	6.3	2.6	51%	22.1	0.22	0.55	0.44	2.11	2.96
Eric Bledsoe	14.9	4.1	3.6	1.9	54%	14.4	0.41	0.34	0.25	0.96	-3.69

• They scored at similar rates, however in completely different ways. Almost half of Bledsoe’s shots this year were 3PTs; Rondo scored almost exclusively at the rim and at the free throw line. While Bledsoe is certainly a better shooter than Rondo; I don’t believe he is in Rondo’s league in terms of defense or offensive facilitation.

              Every year as the draft approaches, amatuers and professionals alike start comparing college players to established stars. Too many, myself included, fall into the trap of basing their comparisons on visual observations. I saw a game earlier this year where Bledsoe torched Indiana to the tune of 23 pts. on 8-10 shooting. I did not see the game a month later where he shot 2-7 with 5 turnovers in a loss to South Carolina (Kentucky’s first loss of the season). The great thing about statistics is that they can show me what I didn’t see. I can combine my visual observations with the data from everything my eyes missed. My eyes might tell me he plays like Russell Westbrook. The numbers tell me he produces like Shannon Brown.

              For clarity’s sake, let me recap, and say that I don’t argue with Eric Bledsoe’s potential; I just see a different sort of potential than most have predicted. Where others see Russell Westbrook or Rajon Rondo as his ceiling; I see Bobby Jackson or Leandro Barbosa. To me he is a slasher/scorer. A guy who comes off the bench and wreaks havoc for 15-20 minutes a game. He is not a guy I would trust with a set offense. He is not a guy I trust to make the right decision with the ball in his hand in the last minute of a game. I think the reason I find poking holes in his draft bubble so important, is the nightmare of Larry Bird being fooled into thinking this is the Pacer’s point guard of the future. He has all the potential to be a solid contributer in this league, but I think the chances of him being an effective NBA point guard are about as great as the chances of me hitting a unicorn with my Bentley on the way home from work.

The More Things Change . . .

            Depending on your viewpoint, things are looking up in Pacerland. Since the beginning of March the Pacers are 9-9. While they are showing a previously unseen level of offensive efficiency, they have also played themselves into the back end of the lottery. As with every other Pacer fan, I feel completely conflicted about this turn of events. There is talent to be had throughout the Draft Lottery this year, but the Pacers could really use the security of a Top 5 pick. That being said, nothing gives hope for next year quite like finishing the season on a tear. The problem is that this has happened the last two years. Here is the Pacers’ records for the months of March and April the last two years:

• ’08-’09   –   11-10
• ’07-’08   –   13-10

        Each of those seasons finished with me saying “Just wait until next year.” They fooled me twice into thinking they had it figured out and that next season they would finally put the pieces back together. What is it that George W. Bush says about situations like this? Fool me twice? Shame on me? Needless to say, I am a little nervous about getting fooled again.

             Many Pacers bloggers and fans have dissected this situation so I don’t have much else to add. I did want to give some previews for some longer more involved posts that are coming up.

• The Pacers current hot steak has completely nullified the draft strategy suggestions I made in Playing Gm. Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3. I jumped the gun and demonstrated how much faith I had in the team by expecting them to continue losing at the same pace; lesson learned. Part 4 will be delayed until after the draft lottery, when I can appropriately reexamine my recommendations.
• I began working on a variation of David Thorpe’s (of ESPN) Rookie School. All of a sudden everyone on the roster looks like an All-Star, so I think I will wait until the end of the season before making recommendations about what specific skill sets each player needs to develop. Look for this post some time in May.
• For the past couple weeks I have been working on a post about Jim O’Brien. A lot of Pacer fans, myself included, have called for him to be fired. There aren’t many statistics which can be used to accurately gauge the positive or negative effect of a coach. I have been working on collecting some, to try and paint an accurate picture of his effectiveness this season. Look for this post soon after the end of the regular season.

Until Next Year…

I’ve been out of action for about a week. Here are some of my thoughts about the end of the college basketball season:

• I’ve heard a lot of Gordon Hayward bashing after his performance against Duke last night. To me, he was the most impressive player on the floor. He certainly missed some open jumpers and a couple of really tough looks in the last minute. He also got wherever he wanted on the floor with dribble, absuing everyone from Singler and Thomas to Scheyer and Smith.  He also made some surprisingly athletic plays, including one incredible follow. I was most impressed by his defense. Over the course of the game he defended every Duke starter. From guards to centers he made an impact, used his length to affect shots and did it all without fouling. In my humble opinion, he helped his draft stock more than any else at the Final Four.
• It was heartbreaking to watch the Da’sean Butler injury. He was a borderline NBA prospect anyway, but I hope this isn’t the last time we see him having an impact on the basketball court.
• The most amazing thing about the whole Da’Sean Butler injury was Coach Huggins’ reaction. I admit it was strange the way he kept stroking his face, but it was an honest and unabashed demnstration of how much Huggins cares for his players. It was certainly a side of him I had never seen or considered before. Whenever I think of Huggins I remember a particular anecdote about his days as a player at WVU. I can’t remember where I heard the story and I do have a habit of embellishing things as I add them to my long term memory banks. The story is that during a game, a fight broke out between Huggins and an opposing player. Huggins threw a punch and knocked the opponent out cold. After the game the opposing player’s father confronted Huggins in the parking lot. Huggins responded by knocking the father out cold as well.  He is also famous for punching out a police horse. It doesn’t quite jive with what we saw on the floor with Butler last weekend.
• A lot of people fell in love with Eric Bledsoe when he was busy dropping 29 pts. with 8 3’s on E. Tennesee. I would like to remind everyone that he is the same guy he was the rest of the season. Draftexpress sums it up nicely.

                     Bledsoe has a tendency to over- dribble and over-commit when driving to the basket, appearing out of control at times, which is a big reason for his extremely high turnover rate—coughing the ball up on an incredible 27% of his possessions. He averaged more turnovers than assists, giving him both the worst AST/TO ratio and pure point rating of any point guard prospect in this draft.

• As the season ends there are some players who will be leaving college basketball; a few will even be taking degrees with them. A few I will miss in particular: 
  •    Goodbye to Tommy Mason-Griffin! Does the D-League have a summer league for guys like him? Don’t worry Tommy I’m sure you will love playing in Erie, it’s a great city!
  • Goodbye to Jarvis Vanardo! I’ve enjoyed watching your dominating defense of the paint as much as I enjoyed watching you fumble entry passes out of bounds. Best of luck!
  • Goodbye to Sherron Collins! My advice to you is to hire a priest and exorcise the ghost of Khalid El-Amin from your body.
  • Goodbye to Da’Sean Butler! Your effort and leadership will be missed in the Big East next year. You were the Anti-Willie Warren and college basketball could use more players like you.
  • Goodbye to Greivis Vasquez! There will be a severe lack of smarminess in the ACC next year.
  • Goodbye to Jon Scheyer! I truly admire the way you completely re-made yourself from a complementary 2-guard into an NCAA Champion point guard. I wish you the best, and hope to see you fighting A.J. Price for minutes in a Pacers uniform next year.
  • Goodbye to John Wall! I have resigned myself that you probably won’t be a Pacer next year. For your sake, I am hoping you be a Timberwolf either.
• Thanks to all the coaches, players and support staff for a terrific 09/10 college basketball season!

Playing GM part 3.

          This is the third, of a four part post stating my draft and free agency recommendations for the Pacers during this offseason. If you are interested, check out Part 1 and Part 2.

1st Round – Pick no. 4(ish)

Evan Turner   –    Ohio State   –   6′7″     205 lbs.   –   SG/PG

            This was the most difficult pick to decide on, and I am sure it will be for Larry and Co. as well. First, let me say that I don’t actually think Evan Turner will be available at the fourth pick. The Pacers currently have the 4th worst record in the league. My position, is that whatever happens Turner should be their #1 target. Ideally, we will get lucky in the lottery and end up with the 1st or 2nd pick. If not then we should aggressively pursue a trade to move up, using our 1st rounder, wherever it falls, and the expirings of Foster, Murphy, Dunleavy or Ford. They aren’t Splenda, but Rush and Solomon Jones could be used to “sweeten” the deal. I will certainly not complain if we end up with John Wall or Derrick Favors, but for me, Turner is the guy. Turner has been thoroughly discussed and evaluated, celebrated and honored, glorified and drooled over, since the season began. I certainly don’t have anything new to add to from a scouting standpoint, but I would like to recap some highlights. Here is what Draftexpress.com lists as Turner’s strengths:

• Ability to play at different speeds
• Excellent skill-level
• Mid-range game
• Offensive creativity
• Pick and roll play
• Point Forward
• Transition play
• Versatility
• Ability to create own shot
• Change of gears/Hesitation moves
• Commitment to playing defense
• Defensive awareness
• Defensive fundamentals
• Versatility to defend multiple positions
• Aggressiveness
• Basketball IQ
• Coachable
• Experience
• Potential
• Unselfishness
• Winning mentality
• High-level productivity
• Ability to create for others
• Court vision
• Body control
• Coordination
• Fluidity
• Low Center of Gravity
• Size for position
• Solid frame
• Excellent rebounder
• Mid-range Jumper

         A pretty impressive list. I bolded and italicized the ones that seem to be weaknesses of the current Pacers roster, or ones that should be big assests as a rookie in the NBA. (For readers unfamiliar with my particular brand of subtlety – I realize they are ALL bolded and italicized. That’s kind of the point.) Also from Draftexpress.com, here are his weaknesses:

•  Turnover prone
• Average explosiveness
• Plays below the rim
• 3-point range
• 3-point shooting percentages
• Limited number of 3-point attempts

        An impressively short list, especially when you consider that #2 + #3 essentially say the same thing, and so do #4 + #5 + #6. There are really only 3 things on this list. Turnover prone, average athleticism and not a great 3-Point shooter. I bolded and italicized the one that I think will actually be a benefit to the Pacers. The last thing we need to add to our roster is another sub-par shooter, to jack up contested jumpers. Let’s take a look at some of his numbers for this year and last:

	Pts/40	Reb/40	Ast/40	Blk/40	Stl/40	TO/40	PF/40
08/09	20.8	8.5	4.8	1.0	2.1	4.2	3.5
09/10	23.5	11.2	7.0	1.1	2.2	4.8	3.3

Incredible!

	FG%	2PT%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%
08/09	50.3%	50.7%	44%	78.8%	52%	59%
09/10	53.8%	56.6%	28.6%	73%	55%	59%

Amazing!

	PER	USG	WS/40	P/Pos	A/TO	A/POS	A/FGA
08/09	25.7	25.7%	9.4	1.07	1.12	0.24	0.34
09/10	32.0	28.1%	13.9	1.07	1.47	0.32	0.42

             This guy is a beast. He does absolutely everything on the floor and does it well. Everywhere you look there are eyepopping numbers. His 3Pt% is low, but he offsets that by averaging less than one attempt per game, and shooting an absurd 56.6% on 2PT’s! His turnover are higher than last year, but he still increased his assist rate when compared to turnovers, possessions used or field goals attempted. My perspective on this is that he decided to focus on his all-around game this year. He made it a point to pad those assist and rebounding numbers. Often this meant he was forcing passes, and looking for the home-run assist, as opposed to letting the offense flow a little more naturally. His PER is simply incredible for a guy who uses 28% of his teams possessions.

         Most would agree that the Pacers lineup has gaping holes at PF, SG and PG. Anyone really think Brandon Rush is the long term answer at shooting guard? Anyone really think we are competing for a championship with A.J. Price running the offense? Drafting Evan Turner gives us a chance to kill two birds with one stone. More details will follow in the fourth part of this post, but I see Evan Turner playing shooting guard for the Pacers. From this position he can handle the ball and facilitate the offense in much the same way Brandon Roy does for Portland, or Dwayne Wade does for Miami. (Probably more Roy than Wade). Turner is not going to play point guard in the NBA. He might fill that role offensively for a team, but he simply cannot contain guys like Chris Paul and Derrick Rose defensively. I see him handling the ball at the off-guard and being paired with a shooting point, someone similar to A.J. Price; only much, much, much, much better.

           To finish, let me explain why I think Turner has more value than some of the other players available. The first arguement against selecting Turner would be John Wall. My answer to those clamoring for Wall has four parts: Allen Iverson, Stephon Marbury, Baron Davis, Steve Francis. These are four points guards taken in the first 10 picks of the draft. Each player was described as having elite offensive capabilities, and game changing athelticism, as has Wall. None of them has won a title. Outside of Iverson’s lone championship appearance, none have been particularly large contributers on great teams. Mostly they have put up great numbers for bad teams. They also all saw huge drop-offs in production when injuries or age took away their athletic edge. Ray Allen, Lamar Odom, and Richard Hamilton have all won championships. They also were drafted after Iverson and Marbury in Allen’s case, and after Davis and Francis in Odom and Hamilton’s case. They have all been huge contributers on championship teams, and they have done it with versatile skills, and basketball IQ, not athleticism. My point is not that John Wall won’t be a great player. My point is that his ability to lead a team to a championship is not a sure thing. You need all kinds of players, with all kinds of skills and abilities to make a truly great team. For me you take the play with the transcendent skill set, will and basketball IQ, before you take the player with the transcendent athleticism.

             Another difficult part about recommending Turner, is that this draft is so deep at the PF position, another huge need for the Pacers. Still, Turner is that good. In addition, the 2011 draft looks to have several terrific prospects at the PF position, including: Perry Jones (Commited to Baylor), Mason Plumlee (Duke), John Henson (UNC), JaMychal Green (Alabama), Chris Singleton (FSU), Arnett Moultrie (UTEP), Aaric Murray (LaSalle), Trey Thompson (UGA), JaJuan Johnson (Purdue), and Jeremy Tyler (dropped out of high school, was asked to leave his Israeli team, currently looking for a European contract, I know I just threw up a little in mouth to). That doesn’t even include the unheralded nobody, who will inevitably show up and rocket up the draft charts, a’la Hassan Whiteside. There is depth at PF in next year’s draft. There is no one with the refined skill set, versatility, and absolute will to win, of Evan Turner, available next year. We need him!

Playing GM part 2.

          This is the second, of a four part post stating my draft and free agency recommendations for the Pacers during this offseason. In the first part, I suggested selecting Jon Scheyer with the 2nd round pick the Pacers will hopefully receive from Dallas this year. This post will focus on my recommendation for the Pacers own second round pick. As I stated before, I am using Draftexpress.com as a reference for what players should be available at each draft position. So without further ado . . .

2nd Round – Pick no. 36

Craig Brackins   –    Iowa State   –   6′10″     230 lbs.   –   PF/C

              This is where making pick recommendations becomes a little more difficult. With a pick at the end of the 2nd round a team is hoping to get some value; with a pick at the beginning of the 2nd round a team is expecting value. I believe this is a draft slot where the Pacers need to get some size. Who knows what kind of shape Jeff Foster and Tyler Hansborough will return in? Solomon Jones has been about as useful as expected, which is not very. Finally, with Murphy’s contract expiring at the end 2010/2011, there is a good chance that he will be moved over the summer or during the season. This leaves a lot of holes in the Pacers frontcourt. My decision here has as much to do with the shortcomings of the other players available, as it does with the strengths of Craig Brackins. Before I explain my rationale for selecting him, let me explain some of the players I passed over and why.

• Yancy Gates, Andrew Ogilvy, and Deon Thompson all have some specific skills but don’t appear to have much upside.
• Charles Garcia seems to have a lot of upside, but has a LONG way to go before he would be a consistent contributor at the next level.
• Jarvis Vanardo would bring some athleticism and shot blocking, but not much else. He has the potential to be a shorter, skinnier Hasheem Thabeet. (Ask the Grizzlies how that’s working out.)
• I gave Dexter Pittman a look, but in the end I thought he duplicated to much of what Roy Hibbert already brings to the table. They would never be able to play together because of their lack of mobility and redundant offensive skills.
• I am a big fan of Trevor Booker and I think he will end up really helping an NBA club down the road. The problem is that he is a tweener, and will likely spend a lot more time at the 3 than at the 4.
• I gave Kenneth Faried a really long look; a really, really long look. I love his motor, his energy and his athleticism. His rebounding numbers are absolutely monstrous (17.7 Reb/40, 5.7 OffREB/40). The problem is that his offensive game needs so much work. The Pacers offensive has been so bad this season, I don’t feel like they can take a chance on someone who won’t be able to contribute at that end of the floor.

                 So after knocking out the players above, I settled on Craig Brackins. I’d like to start my rationale by taking a look at some statistics. The numbers are a great indication of the strengths and weaknesses, potential and shortcomings of Brackins.

	Pts/40	Reb/40	Ast/40	Blk/40	Stl/40	TO/40	PF/40
08/09	26.0	12.2	1.7	1.2	0.7	3.0	2.7
09/10	18.0	9.3	2.4	1.4	0.9	2.3	2.0

                   The first things that jumps out are the big declines in points and rebounds from last year. I believe this can be attributed to a few different factors. The first is the extra attention being paid to Brackins by opposing defenses. The second is the addition of JUCO transfer, Marquis Gilstrap. In their evaluation of power forward prospects at the end of the 08/09 season, Draftexpress.com noted that Brackins was someone who could really benefit from better players around him, specifically guards. The addition of Gilstrap has seemed to help him in some areas but unfortunately really hurt in others. Gilstrap has come in and made an immediate impact, taking shots and rebound opportunities from Brackins. Brackins shouldered a tremendous load last season, as his team’s only real offensive weapon. However, shouldering that load led to some gaudy, but probably inflated scoring and rebounding totals. Despite these drop-offs, there are some impressive improvements. No one will confuse Craig Brackins with a lockdown defender in the post or on the perimeter. That being said he has increased both his steal and block totals, demonstrating improved effort and awareness on the defensive end. The most striking numbers for me were the huge decrease in both turnovers and personal fouls. Of the 87 D1 basketball players averaging at least 1.4 Blk/40, only two, Patrick Patterson (1.9) and Stanley Robinson (1.8), average fewer PF/40 than Brackins. Turnovers and defending without fouling are two huge areas of concern for the Pacers; Brackins looks like he might be able to help.

	FG%	3PT%	FT%	eFG%	TS%
08/09	47.5%	28.4%	69.7%	50%	53%
09/10	41.9%	32.1%	75.3%	45%	50%

                         Brackins has seen a huge drop off in FG% this year. This fact is especially troubling, given that he is taking less shots (and presumably better shots), because of the presence of Gilstrap. The bright spots are that his 3PT%, on 3 attempts a game, has risen to respectable levels. His free throw percentage has also risen dramatically. Brackins still shoots way to many contested jumpers, a nauseating symptom of the current Pacers. However, he has shown ability in the post and in isolation situations. I believe a scenario where he is asked to do less offensively, but to do those things more efficiently, will bring out the best in his offensive skills.

	PER	USG	WS/40	Pts/Pos	A/TO	A/POS	A/FGA
08/09	27.0	27.7%	10.9	1.11	0.58	0.07	0.08
09/10	20.7	22.5%	8.9	1.05	1.06	0.14	0.16

                          The large decline in his usage rate again can be attributed mostly to newcomer Marquis Gilstrap. The real treasure in these numbers is his improvement in the Assist metrics. He has doubled his A/TO ratio, both by taking better care of the ball and by making better choices with his passes. He also doubled the number of assists he averaged per possesion and per field goal attempt. This would seem to indicate an awareness of the value of a possession, and how to make better use of his teammates’ offensive talents, meager though they may be. His Pts/Pos declined significantly, but still rank ahead of Al-Farouq Aminu, Greg Monroe, David Ebanks and Ekpe Udoh, all post players projected to be picked ahead of Brackins.

                           Another variable that I haven’t touched on is the coaching staff. For our personnel, and our team as a whole, to make improvements next year there has to be a change at head coach. Coming into this team, as a rookie under O’Brien, in this system, will stunt the development of anyone we choose.  The point is that we are all hoping that their will be a different Pacers head coach next year. A coach dedicated to the effective improvement of young players. It also wouldn’t hurt for some veteran leaderhip, some players to show the young guys how to do the little things that win games. I hope to expand on this subject in the 4th part of this post.

                            This was a difficult pick to make a recommendation on. All the players available are going to come with a few proven skills and a LOT of question marks. I think the proven skills Craig Brackins brings to the table will provide the most value for the Pacers. He can play spot minutes off the bench at either the 4 or the 5 next year. He can provide some versatility to our offensive sets. There is growth potential in the areas of defense and rebounding. Craig Brackins is a risk, but then again so is everyone else.

Efficiency

Reading through Truehoop’s First Cup today, something caught my eye:

 Richard Justice of the Houston Chronicle: “According to Daryl Morey’s evaluations, Kevin Martin has been one of the NBA’s most efficient scorers in the last 30 years. He’s the only player who has shot 40 percent from the beyond 3-point line and averaged eight free-throw attempts a game in the course of an entire season. And he has done it in two of his six NBA seasons.

 

             I think Kevin Martin is terrific, and every public statement by Daryl Morey piques my intellectual curiousity. Keeping with my theme of repressing thoughts of the Pacers atrocious season and preparing for the 2010 draft; I wondered if those numbers (3PT% and FTA/G) would show any standouts in this year’s draft class. Examining the numbers showed only one college player who had reached that threshold this year, Marquez Haynes. I broadened the list to any college players with a 3PT% above 40% who are averaging more than 5 FTA’s/G. Remarkably, that list is still only 10 players.

Name	Position	School	3PT%	FTA/G	Draftexpress Projection
Jimmer Fredette	PG	BYU	48.2%	6.4	2nd Rd, #9 2011
Elias Harris	SF/PF	Gonzaga	45.2%	5.4	1st Rd, #14 2011
Mark Payne	SG/SF	UC Davis	43.9%	6.3	2nd Rd, #29 2011
Adrian Oliver	PG/SG	San Jose State	41.7%	7.0	Undrafted
Marquez Haynes	PG/SG	Texas-Arlington	41.0%	8.5	Undrafted
Scottie Reynolds	PG/SG	Villanova	40.9%	6.0	Undrafted
Jon Scheyer	PG/SG	Duke	40.9%	5.5	2nd Rd, #29 2010
Luke Babbitt	PF/SF	Nevada	40.8%	5.8	2nd Rd, #5 2011
Sylven Landesberg	SG	Virginia	40.7%	5.2	2nd Rd, #1 2011
Damion James	PF/SF	Texas	40.5%	6.6	1st Rd, # 25 2010

* I left off Keith Benson from Oakland, and Gus Gilchrist from South Florida because they are both Power Forwards with fewer than 20 3PT attempts on the season.

                   There are some guys on this list that have been getting a lot of attention like Elias Harris, Scottie Reynolds and Damion James. There are some others playing really well, but getting no attention, like Jimmer Fredette, Mark Payne and Luke Babbitt. I was glad to see Jon Scheyer on this list (my recent recommendation for the player the Pacers should select with the 2nd Rd). pick they receive from Dallas this year. The most interesting thing to me is that, other than Elias Harris, there are no players on this list likely to get drafted in the lottery. It goes without saying that players reaching these two statistical benchmarks are very efficient scoring the ball. Most of the players on this list also have some obvious flaws, especially in the size and atheleticism departments, which is impacting their draft status. Still, maybe some of these guys deserve a closer look?

                     To put the examination of these players into context, I assembled a similar table for all college players since the 01/02 season who had a 3PT% better than 40% and averaged over 5 FTA/G.

Name	School	Year	3PT%	FTA/G
Sasa Cuic	Oregon St.	05/06	49.3%	5.6
Adrian Banks	Arkansas	06/07	47.5%	5.5
Chris Paul	Wake Forest	04/05	47.4%	5.8
Ty Lawson	UNC	08/09	47.2%	5.9
Nick George	Virginia Commonwealth	05/06	46.8%	5.1
Chris Paul	Wake Forest	03/04	46.5%	5.7
Acie Law	Texas A+M	06/07	45.8%	5.4
Alex Harris	UCSB	06/07	45.8%	6.9
Dan Dickau	Gonzaga	01/02	45.7%	6.0
Morris Almond	Rice	06/07	45.6%	8.9
George Hill	IUPUI	07/08	45.0%	7.7
Reuben Douglas	New Mexico	01/02	44.9%	5.6
Travis Diener	Marquette	03/04	44.8%	5.0
Jarrius Jackson	Texas Tech	05/06	44.8%	5.8
Al Thornton	Florida State	06/07	44.4%	6.0
Morris Almond	Rice	05/06	44.4%	5.2
Jared Dudley	Boston College	06/07	44.3%	6.4
Trey Johnson	Jackson State	05/06	44.1%	7.3
D.J. Augustin	Texas	06/07	44.1%	5.1
Jeff Teague	Wake Forest	08/09	44.1%	7.1
Luke Jackson	Oregon	03/04	44.0%	6.1
Andrew Wisniewski	Centenary	01/02	43.8%	7.1
Jarrius Jackson	Texas Tech	06/07	43.6%	5.6
Ryan Toolson	Utah Valley St.	07/08	43.6%	5.7
Danny Granger	New Mexico	04/05	43.3%	6.8
Dior Lowhorn	San Fransisco	08/09	43.2%	5.1
Dan Grunfeld	Stanford	04/05	43.1%	5.2
Luke Babbitt	Nevada	08/09	42.9%	5.2
Mark Tyndale	Temple	06/07	42.9%	6.6
Adam Morrison	Gonzaga	05/06	42.8%	9.4
Cartier Martin	Kansas State	05/06	42.7%	5.6
Ben Woodside	N. Dakota St.	08/09	42.7%	8.3
Henry Domercant	E. Illinois	02/03	42.4%	9.1
Alex Harris	UCSB	07/08	42.3%	7.2
C.J. Watson	Tennesee	05/06	42.2%	5.7
Travis Hansen	BYU	01/02	42.2%	6.1
Ryan Thompson	Rider	08/09	42.2%	5.5
J.J. Redick	Duke	05/06	42.1%	7.1
Chris Lofton	Tennessee	06/07	41.9%	5.1
Ben Gordon	Connecticut	02/03	41.9%	5.4
Will Daniels	Rhode Island	06/07	41.8%	6.5
Andrew Wisniewski	Centenary	03/04	41.8%	7.0
Chris Douglas-Roberts	Memphis	07/08	41.3%	5.7
Keith McLeod	Bowling Green	01/02	41.2%	8.2
Luis Flores	Manhattan	01/02	41.1%	6.5
Antoine Aquido	Hofstra	07/08	41.0%	5.4
Ryan Anderson	California	07/08	41.0%	6.0
Ben Woodside	N. Dakota St.	05/06	40.9%	7.2
Steve Burtt	Iona	05/06	40.7%	6.6
Jerryd Bayless	Arizona	07/08	40.7%	7.4
James Harden	Arizona St.	07/08	40.7%	6.6
Jodie Meeks	Kentucky	08/09	40.6%	6.5
Travis Diener	Marquette	04/05	40.5%	6.4
Bo McCalebb	New Orleans	07/08	40.5%	7.0
Gary Neal	Towson	05/06	40.5%	7.8
Aaron Jackson	Duquesne	08/09	40.5%	5.5
Jared Newson	Tennessee-Martin	05/06	40.4%	6.5
Kevin Durant	Texas	06/07	40.4%	7.8
Dylan Page	UW-Milwaukee	03/04	40.4%	5.6
J.J. Redick	Duke	03/04	40.4%	6.3
Reece Gaines	Louisville	02/03	40.3%	5.9
Blake Stepp	Gonzaga	02/03	40.3%	5.3
Brandon Roy	Washington	05/06	40.2%	6.4
Troy Bell	Boston College	02/03	40.2%	8.6
Quincy Douby	Rutgers	05/06	40.1%	5.3
Pat Calathes	St. Joseph’s	07/08	40.0%	5.1
Luke Jackson	Oregon	01/02	40.0%	5.3
James Jones	Miami	02/03	40.0%	5.0
Jeremy Lin	Harvard	08/09	40.0%	6.0

Green – Current NBA Players       

 * To pare down this list to legitimate qualifiers I only included players who attempted at least two 3p FGs per game.

** If you reduce the 3PT% threshold to 38% then the list would include current NBA players Deron Williams, Stephon Curry and Courtney Lee         

             This list breaks down into some pretty distinct categories. You have the players from small and mid-major schools who put up ridiculous numbers against 2nd tier competition (Trey Johnson, Andrew Wisniewski, Ryan Toolson). There are the busts,  the wash-outs, and the not quites (Reece Gaines, Luke Jackson, Quincy Douby, Chris Lofton). There are also some legitimatly useful NBA players, guys making meaningful contributions (James Jones, J.J. Redick, Jerryd Bayless, James Harden, Ryan Anderson, etc.). Finally there are some stars on this list (Chris Paul, Kevin Durant, Brandon Roy, Danny Granger). Granger would be the exception, but Durant, Roy and Paul would appear on any list of the 10 most efficient offensive players in the NBA.

             There is certainly not a direct correlation between excelling in these categories at the college level, and being succesful in the NBA. I do think it is an interesting way to look at scoring efficency. Excelling in these categories seems to indicate not just skill level, but the awareness of when to use those skills to make the most of your time on the floor. Knowing when to use your jump shot and when to attack the basket to maximize efficiency is a skill that is sorely lacking  in a lot of NBA backcourt players. If Daryl Morey is using this as a tool to analyze players than it is good enough for me . . . . . . . and hopefully the Pacers.

Playing GM part 1.

            I am a huge Pacers fan, a fact which has caused considerable emotional distress this season. According to Tim Donahue at Eight Points, Nine Seconds this year’s team is among the worst this franchise has ever put forth. Even a casual fan’s observations would back up the numbers Donahue puts together.

              The good news is that spring is right around the corner. While some fans are gearing up for their team’s playoff runs, others get the excitement and joy of preparing for the NBA Draft. Although they are still awaiting FDA approval, websites like Draftexpress.com and NBADraft.net can serve as powerful antidpressants to NBA fans in New Jersey, Minnesota, Washington and Indiana. Today I will be wearing my fantasy GM hat and making my personal recommendations for the Pacers’ draft strategy. This will be a 4 part post, with the first three posts focusing on my recommendation for each Pacers draft pick. The 4th post will focus on some possible players to target through trades or free agency moving into next season. I am going to move in reverse order starting with the Pacers lowest 2nd round pick and move towards their 1st Round pick. I will be using Draftexpress.com as a reference for what players will be available at each draft position.

(I am operating under the assumption that the Pacers will be receiving the Dallas Mavericks’ 2nd round pick this year to complete the Shawne Williams trade. The pick is officially listed as either Dallas’ 2010 or 2011 2nd round pick. I couldn’t find any clarification on whether the Pacers will recieve it this year or next.)

2nd Round – Pick no. 53 (from Dallas)

Jon Scheyer   –    Duke University   –   6’5″     180 lbs.   –   PG/SG

              Scheyer has been a favorite of mine for a long time, and I would love to see the Pacers snag him at the end of the second round. There is usually very little productive value to be found at the end of the second round; and many teams use these picks as a chance to take a flyer on a raw athlete (Bill Walker 2008, D.J. Strawberry 2007) or an international player which can be stashed overseas and developed for free (Tadija Dragicevic 2008, Marcin Gortat 2005). There is nothing wrong with this strategy, but I belive Scheyer could step in right away and contribute as a second-string point guard. Here are some of his stats from this season:

	Pts/40	Reb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	3pFG%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	TO/Pos	Usg	PER	WS/40
Jon Scheyer	20.3	3.8	5.9	1.7	40.30%	88.70%	52%	59%	0.43	0.4	3.06	0.12	22.00%	26.2	8.8

              Shooting has always been a strength for Scheyer, and his numbers this season continue to show this. He is a deadeye shooter with his feet set, but has struggled in the past when asked to shoot off the dribble, or contested. I believe this presents more of a problem for him at the college level. In the NBA, especially in a back-up point guard role, he will be surrounded with many more offensive weapons and will be asked to play more to his strengths, facilitating the offense and knocking down open jumpers. Another number which should jump off the page is his ratio of FTA/FGA. Scheyer attempts 6.2 FT/40min, a remarkable number considering his athletic limitations. His 6.2 FTA/40 rank ahead of many post players projected as first and second round picks this year, including Craig Brackins, Derek Favors, Ekpe Udoh, Gavin Edwards and  Patrick Patterson. As an 89% FT shooter, his ability to get to the line against quicker, faster players is a powerful asset.

              Scheyer began his college career as a 2-guard, a fact which makes his numbers this year even more incredible. His assist to turnover ratio is impeccable, currently ranking first in all of college basketball. It is also worth noting that it is nearly double the assist to turnover ratio of both John Wall and Evan Turner; two prolific ball handlers and likely top-5 picks. His 5.9 Ast/40 min. are a testament to the progress he has made in transitioning from shooting guard, to full-time and effective point guard.

               Defense is always going to be Scheyer’s biggest weakness. His physical tools hinder him from being a top-notch, lockdown defender. I do believe that what he lacks in quickness he can make up in intelligence and determination. He is a solid, if unspectacular defender at the collegiate level, struggling mostly with containing dribble penetration. However, Scheyer has terrific size for point guard position and with some coaching could use that even more effectively to his advantage. Although they may not be the majority, there are plenty of players who came into the league pegged as defensive liabilities, who through effort and skill development have become positives for their team at that end of the floor. Two that jump to mind are J.J. Redick and Jared Jeffries.

               A lot of Pacer fan posts lately have been focused on improving the talent of the team. I don’t think that is nearly as important as improving the effort, heart and IQ of the team. I know many will condem this pick as another slow, white shooter, severely lacking in talent. I can’t argue about Scheyer’s skin color or lack of footspeed, but I do beg to differ on the talent level.  (I also want to mention that of all the criteria used to judge potential draft picks, skin color should probably be the last on the list.) To help make my case, I wanted to compare Scheyer to an NBA player who I think best represents his ceiling as a player. I spent some time perusing statistics and the match that felt the strongest was Chicago Bulls point guard and University of Kansas Alumnus Kirk Hinrich.

                The physical similarities are obvious, lanky, white, good size for the point guard position. (Scheyer is listed at 6’5″, Hinrich measured out at 6’3.75″ in shoes before the NBA Draft.) Although we don’t have similar pre-draft measurements for Scheyer yet, I believe they will bear out an edge in athleticism to Hinrich. However, I think the statistics demonstrate an edge in skills and basketball IQ for Scheyer.

	Pts/40	Reb/40	Ast/40	Stl/40	3pFG%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FTA/FGA	Ast/FGA	A/TO	TO/Pos	Usg	PER	WS/40
Kirk Hinrich	20.6	4.5	4.2	2.2	40.60%	70.40%	57%	59%	0.26	0.27	1.57	0.15	19.50%	22.3	8
Jon Scheyer	20.3	3.8	5.9	1.7	40.30%	88.70%	52%	59%	0.43	0.4	3.06	0.12	22.00%	26.2	8.8

                  From my perspective, this pick should be viewed as a freebie. Regardless of how the last 30 or so games play out, Dallas should finish near the top of the league, and this pick will most likely be near the bottom of the second round. I am not arguing that Scheyer is a potential star, or even a starter. I do think he has the potential to be a heady, hardworking back-up point guard. For 12-15 minutes a game he is going to bring a lot more to the table than he is going to take away, and for the most part I think he is ready to do it walking through the door next year. He doesn’t have the athleticism of A.J. Price, but I think he can contribute much more. A.J. has more potential as an individual scorer, but Scheyer will do more for the offensive of our second unit as a whole, with his passing, intelligence, shooting and effort. There is usually not a lot of talent available at the end of the 2nd round but I think Scheyer represents a tremendous value, given the lateness of the pick, his well-developed skill set, and the needs of our team.

Part Two coming soon …………………