The problem is that he's using synergy percentile, which is just based on PPP. A higher percentile doesn't necessarily mean a better isolation or transition player. It's kind of like basing your evaluation of shooting solely on 3FG%. If you don't consider context/volume, you would come away with awful takes on 3 point shooting. For example, Cody Williams shot a higher percentage than Tre Johnson from three.
Following Potential 2025 Draftees
- Thread starter Elizah Huge
- Start date
The problem is that he's using synergy percentile, which is just based on PPP. A higher percentile doesn't necessarily mean a better isolation or transition player. It's kind of like basing your evaluation of shooting solely on 3FG%. If you don't consider context/volume, you would come away with awful takes on 3 point shooting. For example, Cody Williams shot a higher percentage than Tre Johnson from three.
I was in a middle of a similar reply and yeah, he doesn't take in to consideration volume, and for some of the numbers he puts out there I'm sure there is the tiniest of sample size.
One of the other problems I have with any numerical comparison between NBA draft prospects is the level of competition is so different.
That's another good point. While it's not my cup of tea, putting a heavy emphasis on transition, isolation, and C&S is not totally illogical. He just does a poor job of assessing who is actually good at those things. We should consider efficiency and volume together, but if I had to bet, a volume leaderboard would do a better job of representing the best transition/isolation players by synergy play type. Take a look at the volume leaderboards in volume vs percentile and I think this becomes obvious. I would be more on board with his line of thinking if he took a more holistic view of these areas by considering the volume and level of competition.
Here is some Boogie Fland propaganda now that I've had some time to run the numbers.
If you look at Fland's numbers on Tankathon or ESPN they are diluted because they include the tournament games where he was just playing a supportive role and his hand wasn't 100% yet. Here are his numbers for the games against non conference P5 teams:
16pts/4reb/5ast 34/38/94 shooting splits (His full non conference FG% was 48%)
He definitely struggled in conference play, but the majority of those games he was playing with a busted hand. Here are some comparisons:
Fears first four conference games: 13.5pts/4reb/3ast 36/20/70 shooting splits
Tre's first four conference games: 17pts/3reb/1ast 42/30/90 shooting splits
Fland first four conference games: 15pts/3reb/4ast 36/32/86 shooting splits - 2 games played with a busted hand
The first guy is a consensus top 10 pick, the second guy is in consideration for pick 3, the 3rd guy is being mocked in the mid second round.
If you look at Fland's numbers on Tankathon or ESPN they are diluted because they include the tournament games where he was just playing a supportive role and his hand wasn't 100% yet. Here are his numbers for the games against non conference P5 teams:
16pts/4reb/5ast 34/38/94 shooting splits (His full non conference FG% was 48%)
He definitely struggled in conference play, but the majority of those games he was playing with a busted hand. Here are some comparisons:
Fears first four conference games: 13.5pts/4reb/3ast 36/20/70 shooting splits
Tre's first four conference games: 17pts/3reb/1ast 42/30/90 shooting splits
Fland first four conference games: 15pts/3reb/4ast 36/32/86 shooting splits - 2 games played with a busted hand
The first guy is a consensus top 10 pick, the second guy is in consideration for pick 3, the 3rd guy is being mocked in the mid second round.
Just realized I didn't include McNeely, but I would probably put him in the 24-26 range
Basketball Novice
New Member
I don't believe he will work out and I didn't want to be disingenuous and put him at somewhere like 8 or 10 if I don't trust the skillset. In essence, I am not interested in taking the bet on him.
I like the way McNeeley plays more than Riley, and I saw them both enough to feel confident in that opinion.
I need to go back and reevaluate where to put Riley on my board, but I'm pretty confident it will be below McNeeley.
kcgar
Well-Known Member
Couple things. You jump from 8-10 to 23. I think that is disingenuous. Let’s say he only reaches his floor. To me that is not worse than Jabari Smith. Jabari Smith in his current state would absolutely be picked in the lottery in this draft. I think you are crazy
Randomly I was just looking at Jabari Smith's draft profile and it is fairly similar to Ace. I would argue that Jabari's numbers are significantly better though.
Jabari Smith 2022 Draft Profile | Tankathon
Jabari Smith - PF - Auburn - 2022 NBA Draft Profile and Stats
Basketball Novice
New Member
To me, his floor is much lower. The passing does not look good and if his shooting is only average vs. great I don't know what positive value he will bring. He is a big ball of physical talent and potential but he needs to work on a ton of stuff. I am sure he will develop somewhat in the NBA but I am not interested in the Jazz becoming a development camp for 18 and 19 year olds before we overpay them on their 2nd contracts.
Basketball Novice
New Member
Then again, there are high potential, super young prospects that I do like. Like I said, I just don't believe in what Ace brings to the table.
Tagging @SoberasHotRod because I know this is one his guys.
I saw some numbers on twitter that Traore’s rim FG% and Rim rate are actually much higher than I expected. Given his very low 2FG% I thought this might be a case of shooting tons of non-rim 2’s. But if the numbers I saw are correct, it would actually be a result of shooting diabolically bad non-rim 2’s.
I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily a good thing that he is potentially this horrible on non-rim 2’s, but it’s a better than picture I was painting before.
I saw some numbers on twitter that Traore’s rim FG% and Rim rate are actually much higher than I expected. Given his very low 2FG% I thought this might be a case of shooting tons of non-rim 2’s. But if the numbers I saw are correct, it would actually be a result of shooting diabolically bad non-rim 2’s.
I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily a good thing that he is potentially this horrible on non-rim 2’s, but it’s a better than picture I was painting before.
Last edited:
Makes sense, that's at least what the little film that's available shows.
And for the record I'm not a Traore homer, I probably was at first, but he's just someone that I've chosen to follow closely. I've wanted to understand how to scout international players and so I've used Traore as an opportunity to learn more.
I mean, you really think someone that size/athleticism who can shoot isn't bare minimum top 15?
To me Traore just looks fine. Don't see a ton of upside. Think he has to shoot to reach whatever upside he has, and the numbers just aren't encouraging.
Don't think the shot looks horrible though. I could see him as high as 18-ish.
Don't think the shot looks horrible though. I could see him as high as 18-ish.
NBA Big Board threw out some shooting stat on Bailey's 3s where was over 40% on guarded 3s and under 30% on open ones.
I think he just had a bad shooting year at Rutgers.
I think he just had a bad shooting year at Rutgers.
Is Traore known as being a high level defender? That's really the only thing that would sway me on him. Think he just projects as very average offensively with some natural PG skills.