Thee Idiotic Minivan K
Well-Known Member
No mock I saw last year had him anywhere near the second round, 60's?? No.
Following potential 2015 draftees
- Thread starter Dr. Jones
- Start date
No mock I saw last year had him anywhere near the second round, 60's?? No.
Thee Idiotic Minivan K
Well-Known Member
Word on the street is that WCS has gained 20lb's of muscle and increased his vertical. Wish he would fall to us. Imagine having one of gobert or WCS on the court at all times leading the defense.
Analytical projections... not mock drafts. I don't remember if it was Vashro's projection or Pelton's or somebody else's but they generally had him ranked very low...
Just found it - 38th in Vashro, 56th in Pelton's. Analytics models didn't like Hood at all.
Jazz4ever
Well-Known Member
I don't think there is. Locke likes to think so, but Burke and Hood are good examples he likes players with more refined games over elite measurables. And he didn't like Gobert that much, or he would have found a way to get him before 27. The only thing we know is he likes to be aggressive. Moved up for Burke and put his neck out for Gobert. Possibly tried to dangle Favors and the #5 for Parker, not sure if that was a true rumor or not. If so, it will probably temper his aggressiveness this draft, as Favors had a breakout year.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
I remember it being for wiggins
Game6Conley
Well-Known Member
Quinn Cook works out for the Jazz today, I'd much rather see them grab him as an UDFA than use a pick on George De Paula...
Georginho, in my book is now basically redflagged - He increasingly seems like a gimmick in my eyes. I suspect he's closer to a Mardy Collins than some would lead you to believe, Also I think they put this dude on a pedestal while reaching to find PG's to slot ahead of Andrew Harrison. The fact that DX had nice things to say about him yesterday is telling imo, totally trying to save face. Wael Arakji, thoroughly outplayed him.
When De Paula first hit the scene I was buying the hype a bit and thought I'd take him over Andrew Harrison - those days are long gone. His dribble is mostly fluff, he dances in place, goes east-west much, much, much easier than north-south and being that his shooting is way sub-par, I cant help but see the Mardy Collins comparison.. hopefully he proves me wrong because that's one of the least flattering player comps you will ever hear me dish out.
(For those unfamiliar with Mardy Collins, it means his offense is so poor it doesn't matter how good of a defender he is/could be.)
Great quote from Quinn Snyder btw, I hope this rings true;
"We're capable of shooting the ball better with the guys we've got," Snyder says. "We'll get better offensively as guys get more comfortable with each other. … We have so many young variables. I think there's really a sense that we don't need to jump the gun and say, 'we need this, we need this,' we're just going to try to be patient, and that's really how we went about last year. We're in this thing for sustainability. Sometimes, that requires more patience. We've got committed guys."
Georginho, in my book is now basically redflagged - He increasingly seems like a gimmick in my eyes. I suspect he's closer to a Mardy Collins than some would lead you to believe, Also I think they put this dude on a pedestal while reaching to find PG's to slot ahead of Andrew Harrison. The fact that DX had nice things to say about him yesterday is telling imo, totally trying to save face. Wael Arakji, thoroughly outplayed him.
When De Paula first hit the scene I was buying the hype a bit and thought I'd take him over Andrew Harrison - those days are long gone. His dribble is mostly fluff, he dances in place, goes east-west much, much, much easier than north-south and being that his shooting is way sub-par, I cant help but see the Mardy Collins comparison.. hopefully he proves me wrong because that's one of the least flattering player comps you will ever hear me dish out.
(For those unfamiliar with Mardy Collins, it means his offense is so poor it doesn't matter how good of a defender he is/could be.)
Great quote from Quinn Snyder btw, I hope this rings true;
"We're capable of shooting the ball better with the guys we've got," Snyder says. "We'll get better offensively as guys get more comfortable with each other. … We have so many young variables. I think there's really a sense that we don't need to jump the gun and say, 'we need this, we need this,' we're just going to try to be patient, and that's really how we went about last year. We're in this thing for sustainability. Sometimes, that requires more patience. We've got committed guys."
Warning--another of my long research posts:
Here's some statistical results I found about draft age and NBA production. For draft picks 8-30 in the first round and 1-15 in the second round:
18 year olds draftees have produced an average of 4.6 additional win shares throughout their career than would be expected for their draft position.
19 year olds produce 4.8 additional win shares compared to the same expectation.
20 year olds produce 5.2 additional win shares
21 year olds produce 0.3 additional win shares
22 year olds produce 1.1 fewer win shares
23 year olds produce 4.3 fewer win shares
24 year olds produce 5.5 fewer win shares
18 year olds draftees produced .008 additional win shares per 48 minutes than would be expected by their draft position
19 year olds: .018
20 year olds: .011
21 year olds: -.018
22 year olds: -.002
23 year olds: -.002
24 year olds: -.010
EDIT: The numbers in the following paragraph are wrong. I've corrected them in post #12471 (The rest of the numbers in this post should be correct.)
On average, 18 year olds draftees play 308 games equivalents (based on 48 min/game) in their careers
19 year olds: 295
20 year olds: 339
21 year olds: 456
22 year olds: 273
23 year olds: 222
24 year olds: 191
20 year olds have the largest variation in career production (based on standard deviation of expected win shares for draft position). 19 and 21 year olds follow close behind. The variation (based on standard deviation) is about 75% as large for 22 year olds.
Conclusion: Mostly confirms accepted wisdom -- if you want better career and high end production, a 19 or 20 year old is more likely to over-perform their draft position. 19 year olds give great average production, but seem to be a bit of a flameout risk.
A 21 year old will give you the most games on average, but at below average rates per 48. 22 year olds perform a bit below average across the board, but are less risky (But the standard deviations are quite high for all age groups in comparison to the average under- or over-performing rates, so you quite clearly shouldn't put all your eggs into this basket of averages based on age. It's just something that can maybe help on the margins.)
Boring details on methodology follows:
I used the 10 closest drafts (1999-2008) that would give me a fair sample (allow time for player development, since I tracked total win shares). There were 372 total players drafted in the range between first round #8 and second round #15.
Then I computed an expected win share (and win share/48) score for each draft position (basketballreference.com data). Because there's quite a bit of variation, I averaged not only on the draft position itself, but on the two picks on either side. For example, the expected win shares of draft position #21 comes from the average total win shares of picks 19, 20, 21, 22, 23.
Then I computed the average difference between expected and actual win shares (& WS48) for each age cohort in the draft. I used age as of December 31 in the draft year.
There are some issues that make this methodology an imperfect test. You can probably figure them out as well or better than I can. But I think it's a pretty good test nevertheless. I adapted the idea from an article I saw in Bleacher Report (interestingly enough):
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...rs-would-both-benefit-from-age-limit-increase
But while the methodology is similar, I reached a rather different conclusion from that original study (though I asked a somewhat different question -- I used age and included non-college players; the original used college class and only included college draftees). I think my methodology was better, though you can judge that if you want.
Here's some statistical results I found about draft age and NBA production. For draft picks 8-30 in the first round and 1-15 in the second round:
18 year olds draftees have produced an average of 4.6 additional win shares throughout their career than would be expected for their draft position.
19 year olds produce 4.8 additional win shares compared to the same expectation.
20 year olds produce 5.2 additional win shares
21 year olds produce 0.3 additional win shares
22 year olds produce 1.1 fewer win shares
23 year olds produce 4.3 fewer win shares
24 year olds produce 5.5 fewer win shares
18 year olds draftees produced .008 additional win shares per 48 minutes than would be expected by their draft position
19 year olds: .018
20 year olds: .011
21 year olds: -.018
22 year olds: -.002
23 year olds: -.002
24 year olds: -.010
EDIT: The numbers in the following paragraph are wrong. I've corrected them in post #12471 (The rest of the numbers in this post should be correct.)
On average, 18 year olds draftees play 308 games equivalents (based on 48 min/game) in their careers
19 year olds: 295
20 year olds: 339
21 year olds: 456
22 year olds: 273
23 year olds: 222
24 year olds: 191
20 year olds have the largest variation in career production (based on standard deviation of expected win shares for draft position). 19 and 21 year olds follow close behind. The variation (based on standard deviation) is about 75% as large for 22 year olds.
Conclusion: Mostly confirms accepted wisdom -- if you want better career and high end production, a 19 or 20 year old is more likely to over-perform their draft position. 19 year olds give great average production, but seem to be a bit of a flameout risk.
A 21 year old will give you the most games on average, but at below average rates per 48. 22 year olds perform a bit below average across the board, but are less risky (But the standard deviations are quite high for all age groups in comparison to the average under- or over-performing rates, so you quite clearly shouldn't put all your eggs into this basket of averages based on age. It's just something that can maybe help on the margins.)
Boring details on methodology follows:
I used the 10 closest drafts (1999-2008) that would give me a fair sample (allow time for player development, since I tracked total win shares). There were 372 total players drafted in the range between first round #8 and second round #15.
Then I computed an expected win share (and win share/48) score for each draft position (basketballreference.com data). Because there's quite a bit of variation, I averaged not only on the draft position itself, but on the two picks on either side. For example, the expected win shares of draft position #21 comes from the average total win shares of picks 19, 20, 21, 22, 23.
Then I computed the average difference between expected and actual win shares (& WS48) for each age cohort in the draft. I used age as of December 31 in the draft year.
There are some issues that make this methodology an imperfect test. You can probably figure them out as well or better than I can. But I think it's a pretty good test nevertheless. I adapted the idea from an article I saw in Bleacher Report (interestingly enough):
https://bleacherreport.com/articles...rs-would-both-benefit-from-age-limit-increase
But while the methodology is similar, I reached a rather different conclusion from that original study (though I asked a somewhat different question -- I used age and included non-college players; the original used college class and only included college draftees). I think my methodology was better, though you can judge that if you want.
Last edited:
mellow
Well-Known Member
I know that is the basic narrative we have around here, and it seems to get better in each telling. However, for me the narrative doesn't quite fit. For instance last week Walt Perrin was asked about the drafting process, "walt who makes the final decision ?" Without hesitation he said "Dennis will decide, he makes the decision about who to draft after we provide our input". Which is how an organization is run.
It was Dennis who made the trade, if he had reservations about Trey, he could have simply told Ty or anyone else Sorry, we couldn't move up and he was drafted ahead of us. That would be easy for a GM who likes assets and wanted to use the later pick on Rudy.
I think it seems far fetched to say that Dennis locked in on Gobert but Ty Corbin used his Jedi powers to convince Dennis to use that pick to trade up for Trey, because Trey was the droid Ty Corbin was looking for.
I think a more reasonable explanation is Dennis was trying to prop up Ty, back when Trey was still thought of well but Ty's future was uncertain.
This. It's ridiculous to think DL would allow Ty to run his draft. If I remember correctly, DL said Ty was enthusiastic about the trade. He never said Trey was Ty's choice.
I could be wrong, but I think Locke said Gobert would have been the choice at #14 if we hadn't made the trade for Trey.
We need just 1 of those teams to fall in love with him to be in the range of Turner/Johnson.
Carbon13
Well-Known Member
Thing is, i think looney would be a great pick for us. I dont know what it is but when i watch him i notice he has great motorskills for a 4. He just looks fluid with the ball and coordinated. A guy like that who can shoot, dribble, pass, defend is exactly what zach lowe was talking about in his article.
mellow
Well-Known Member
I remember him saying the Jazz discussed it, but I thought he said could rather than would as to suggest it was a possibility but not a certainty.
Yeah to his credit I remembered Locke saying he thinks we could pick Gobert at #14 at the time. Gobert wasn't expected to go that early at the time and I thought he sounded a bit Looney (punn intended).
But yeah, gotta give him that call.
Game6Conley
Well-Known Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=16&v=grpIkI_Yxcw
Doublea
Well-Known Member
or a trade partner.
Doublea
Well-Known Member
@stevekylerNBA: Me personally? --- Kaminsky... I am not as high on Cauley-Stein as others are. https://t.co/rIZ5m4XkcQj
He would draft kaminsky over WCS
He would draft kaminsky over WCS