What's new
By:

Following potential 2015 draftees

Thee jazz fan said:
at the same time we didn't work out Burke. That was a mistake. He was projected to go top 5. The teams that did work him out passed on him.

Makes sense, plus I don't buy booker being that athletic. He didn't play very athletic
Click to expand...

He's not explosive, but he's very fast and laterally quick.
 
Booker is definitely more athletic than Redick. I remember redick in the mcd's game and his frosh yr. He played a similar role to booker. Fifth option. I think redicks a better shooter though.
 
According to reports from Dallas the Mavs will try to trade Raymond Felton(1 year, 4M) in order to clear space to sign Aminu.

Would we be willing to take on his contract for a pick swap in which we acquire their No. 21 pick and give them our No. 42 pick which doesn't require guaranteed money?
 
stitches said:
According to reports from Dallas the Mavs will try to trade Raymond Felton(1 year, 4M) in order to clear space to sign Aminu.

Would we be willing to take on his contract for a pick swap in which we acquire their No. 21 pick and give them our No. 42 pick which doesn't require guaranteed money?
Click to expand...

Maybe, but he would be a Jazzman shorter than Kendrick Perkins. A mid first for 4 million seems pricey, but it is a deep draft and the Fed is inflating the dollar every day so maybe it is fmv.
 
stitches said:
According to reports from Dallas the Mavs will try to trade Raymond Felton(1 year, 4M) in order to clear space to sign Aminu.

Would we be willing to take on his contract for a pick swap in which we acquire their No. 21 pick and give them our No. 42 pick which doesn't require guaranteed money?
Click to expand...

Damn. Hmm. If it works.
 
Yes, that's a deal you should do, but I doubt it is on the table. 2 quality picks in 12 and 21 is a great draft. Heck we could probably trade into the top 7 with one more asset.
 
Some of you may have noticed a while back that Draft Express had an article showing a "consensus" from the analytical draft models. I've been following the APBRmetrics forum since then, since that is the group that has been producing that analytical model consensus.

Apparently, they're going to have another article out in DX sometime soon, with an updated consensus (adding a few more models to the mix) and addressing some of the questions that arose from that first article.

That new consensus will be based on averaging the draft-order rankings of the various models. If you're interested in this stuff, keep an eye out for that in DX.

But the rankings that will appear there, for just-a-bit tricky mathematical reasons, aren't the best way to calculate the consensus. Their method is the most understandable for the reader who is not very familiar with statistics, and that's why they went with it. But the better method is to calculate z-scores within each of the various models before averaging.

One of the contributors to that forum did just that: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...KuuMpI5eFxqby-QU8SobLgIJME/edit#gid=529517843
I wanted to see the scores in a bit more understandable way, so I changed the z-scores into a (approximately 0-100, bell-curve distributed) scale. So the average ranking for about the 100 or so prospects ranked is about a 50. Here's what these results show:

1. Russell 94.5
2. Towns 90.5
3. Okafor 87.6
4. Winslow 78.1
5. Mudiay 78.0
6. Johnson 75.8
7. Looney 74.3
8. Jones 73.0
9. Turner 71.7
10. Wright 66.1
11. Portis 66.0
12. Kaminsky 65.8
13. Payne 63.4
14. WCS 63.3
15. Oubre 62.0
16. Wood 61.4
17. Hunter 60.0
18. RHJ 58.6

and others:
21. Porzingis 56.3
27. Dekker 53.2
29. Lyles 52.9
31. Anderson 52.5
33. Booker 51.6
34. Hezonja 50.9

The obvious suspicion is that these models highly under-rank Kentucky and Spanish-league players. But it's interesting since these are the consensus of seven different models, not just one that may idiosyncratically value things oddly.

Anyway, the usual provisos apply: mathematical models should never be used in place of trained eyes and discerning background checks, etc., but presumably in concert with with them.
 
BENTLEY said:
But I'd hate to see another Trey Burke scenario where the Jazz use assets to move up for a player who turns out worse than the player they could've gotten just staying at 12.

But they could trade up to be sure that nobody else gets the guy they want: Looney, Kaminsky, Turner. I'm not sure but I think I might put them ahead of Johnson.
Click to expand...
The only player I'd trade up for is Mario.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
idiot said:
Some of you may have noticed a while back that Draft Express had an article showing a "consensus" from the analytical draft models. I've been following the APBRmetrics forum since then, since that is the group that has been producing that analytical model consensus.

Apparently, they're going to have another article out in DX sometime soon, with an updated consensus (adding a few more models to the mix) and addressing some of the questions that arose from that first article.

That new consensus will be based on averaging the draft-order rankings of the various models. If you're interested in this stuff, keep an eye out for that in DX.

But the rankings that will appear there, for just-a-bit tricky mathematical reasons, aren't the best way to calculate the consensus. Their method is the most understandable for the reader who is not very familiar with statistics, and that's why they went with it. But the better method is to calculate z-scores within each of the various models before averaging.

One of the contributors to that forum did just that: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...KuuMpI5eFxqby-QU8SobLgIJME/edit#gid=529517843
I wanted to see the scores in a bit more understandable way, so I changed the z-scores into a (approximately 0-100, bell-curve distributed) scale. So the average ranking for about the 100 or so prospects ranked is about a 50. Here's what these results show:

1. Russell 94.5
2. Towns 90.5
3. Okafor 87.6
4. Winslow 78.1
5. Mudiay 78.0
6. Johnson 75.8
7. Looney 74.3
8. Jones 73.0
9. Turner 71.7
10. Wright 66.1
11. Portis 66.0
12. Kaminsky 65.8
13. Payne 63.4
14. WCS 63.3
15. Oubre 62.0
16. Wood 61.4
17. Hunter 60.0
18. RHJ 58.6

and others:
21. Porzingis 56.3
27. Dekker 53.2
29. Lyles 52.9
31. Anderson 52.5
33. Booker 51.6
34. Hezonja 50.9

The obvious suspicion is that these models highly under-rank Kentucky and Spanish-league players. But it's interesting since these are the consensus of seven different models, not just one that may idiosyncratically value things oddly.

Anyway, the usual provisos apply: mathematical models should never be used in place of trained eyes and discerning background checks, etc., but presumably in concert with with them.
Click to expand...

Forget Kentucky and the Spanish, I am greatly underrated here in that list.
 
Michael Qualls at 43 really makes a ton of sense. I believe his personality is a match with the Jazz, and isn't dissimilar to lets say a Trevor Booker or Bryce Cotton. Part of the appeal is that Mike seems to be improving/ fine-tuning his overall skill level by leaps and bounds, the hope is he can keep that trajectory going and you end up with a dynamite 2nd rd pick. He's kind of like an Elijah Millsap, but more bouncy (and obviously younger)..

I think Qualls is the type of player who can make an impact in limited minutes, whether it be running the floor, defending, grabbing rebounds, 50/50 balls, or slashing, and I'm sure he can put his head down and bull his way to the rim(going right) if you asked him to. I'm not going to praise his shooting or ball-skills too much but his shot is far from J.P. Tokoto status. I think he's the type of player that could just sorta blend in and not pan out, I worry a bit what happens to his shooting if he starts out cold and I could see him sort of making those 'trying too hard' gaffes.

If he pans out though, I think he will appear as one of those "this guy is everywhere" players. Also, burying Qualls on the bench is very much different than burying the #12 pick on the bench, for Qualls it could be a blessing to start off slow and get situated.

https://www.draftexpress.com/video/11773/
 
For the love of God can someone please tell me I'm not crazy, because over the weekend I fell in love with Dekker and I want very badly for the Jazz to draft him. I feel like it would be a mistake to take him but I can't turn away from the idea of picking him. Also I'm falling in love with Hunter. That's pretty much due to his shot looking like Curry's shot. Then with in one week both admitted to needing to have better shot selection. My imagination is running wild with dreams of drafting the sg version of Steph Curry. I know 12 is probably too high for Hunter but along with Dekker, I'm talking myself into hunter too. Someone pleassssssssseeeeeeeeee help me out.

I'm pretty sure I've lost all objectivity in the matter. I need help. What ya got for a very confused and frustrated Jazz fan?
 
Thee jazz fan said:
For the love of God can someone please tell me I'm not crazy, because over the weekend I fell in love with Dekker and I want very badly for the Jazz to draft him. I feel like it would be a mistake to take him but I can't turn away from the idea of picking him. Also I'm falling in love with Hunter. That's pretty much due to his shot looking like Curry's shot. Then with in one week both admitted to needing to have better shot selection. My imagination is running wild with dreams of drafting the sg version of Steph Curry. I know 12 is probably too high for Hunter but along with Dekker, I'm talking myself into hunter too. Someone pleassssssssseeeeeeeeee help me out.

I'm pretty sure I've lost all objectivity in the matter. I need help. What ya got for a very confused and frustrated Jazz fan?
Click to expand...

Join the club brotha, I would be fine with about 18-20 players in this draft Dekker and Hunter included. I honestly wouldn't mind taking either at #12 as long as one of the consensus top-10 players isn't there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top