The following is a guest post from WoW Journal reader Erich Doerr. Erich used the Win Score metric to investigate the top prospects for the 2007 NBA Draft. And now he is back with a first look at some of the prospects for the 2008 draft.
Although the Win Score metric was designed to analyze the NBA, the same approach can be applied to other basketball leagues. In particular, I used Win Score to look at the college performances of NBA prospects prior to the 2007 draft. And today I have been invited to provide a glimpse at the possible NBA draft entrants in 2008. So let’s start at the top.
Based on Draftexpress.com’s current mock draft, Michael Beasley is the top NBA prospect. His emergence at Kansas State lives up to all the the hype and so does his Win Score (adjusted for position played). So far, his marks exceed those posted last year by Greg Oden and Kevin Durant.
Other projected high picks, though, are posting less than stellar Win Scores. Looking at only the players listed in the Draftexpress.com mock first round draft, the following table reports NCAA players and their current Position Adjusted Win Score per 48 minutes [PAWS48].
Table One: College Productivity of a Selection of NBA Prospects
It’s important to note that the non-conference schedule – or the weakest part of the schedule for many teams – dominates the data at this point in the season. Still, our early glimpse can still provide some insights.
From Table One we see that most of the projected lottery picks are nowhere near as productive as Beasley. Despite the similar level of hype, O.J. Mayo has been Telfair-rific (not a good thing in the world of Win Scores).
Mayo is not the only player who looks overrated at the moment. For example, it looks like pundits are too quick to credit Memphis’s success to Derrick Rose. While not currently projected as first round material, Joey Dorsey – Rose’s teammate in Memphis — is the kind of player that posts excellent Win Scores (6.97 College PAWS48) but seems underrated by PER (Player Efficiency Rating). A similar story unfolds in Indiana, as Win Scores suggest Eric Gordon may be the second banana to D.J. White (3.75 College PAWS48). And of course, this was the same story told about Texas basketball (D.J. Augustin and Damion James) a few days ago in this forum.
In contrast to Mayo, Rose, Gordon, and Augustin – who again seem overrated at the moment — there are several Win Score powerhouses that are seemingly overlooked. Win Score superstar Kevin Love seems to be projected as a late to mid first rounder. Other first round gems may include Richard Hendrix and Tyler Hansbrough. Each of these players are not thought of as lottery picks. The numbers suggest, though, that people might want to take a second look.
All that said, it’s still clear Michael Beasley is a top prospect and clearly deserves top pick consideration. However, and this was quite surprising to discover, he isn’t the biggest man on the NCAA campus this season.
The Win Score crown currently belongs to Kenny George. “Who’s that?” you may ask, as I know I did. So I looked him up on ESPN. He’s a 7 foot 7, 360 lbs American junior who’s just starting to garner attention now that he’s past some previous knee injuries (See articles here and here, video here). George plays for UNC-Asheville and is averaging 20 minutes per game this season, up from 10 min/g from last season. In these limited minutes he has posted a 12.29 College PAWS48 .
Now, of course there are caveats here. First of all, George might have health issues that make a long-term career in the NBA uncertain. Furthermore, George has also posted his numbers against weaker competition. This is clearly an issue when looking at Win Scores in the NCAA. Win Score was derived from NBA performance, where the talent is more equally distributed. College basketball has many more teams, and players from lesser conferences often post high Win Scores. Those scores should cause people to think a bit. Although it should be said, productive players from small schools can become the best value draft picks (ala Paul Millsap).
Even though George is at a small school, it’s seems likely the hype machine will eventually get into full gear for a 7′7 giant. Though I haven’t seen any 2008 or 2009 mock drafts with his name in it, I fully expect Kenny George to be selected in the draft. His Win Scores are as phenomenal as his size.
Thousands of more words can be spent on NBA draft prospects, but it’s only January and the toughest competition is yet to come. Keep your eyes on the WoW Journal for a full Win Score assessment as the NBA draft approaches.
- Erich Doerr
34 responses so far ↓
Paulo // January 28, 2008 at 1:12 am
I’m curious about Kenny George, and if he’ll wind up as a Shawn Bradley. Are there similarities?
dberri // January 28, 2008 at 1:15 am
Paulo,
George’s numbers are much better than what Bradley did at BYU. From what I have read, though, George may not be completely healthy. So that is an issue.
Basketball » An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft // January 28, 2008 at 3:35 am
[...] dberri wrote a fantastic post today on “An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft”Here’s ONLY a quick extractAlthough the Win Score metric was designed to analyze the NBA, the same approach can be applied to other basketball leagues. In particular, I used Win Score to look at the college performances of NBA prospects prior to the 2007 draft. … [...]
Basketball » Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Paulo // January 28, 2008 at 4:06 am
[...] Paulo wrote a fantastic post today on “Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Paulo”Here’s ONLY a quick extractI’m curious about Kenny George, and if he’ll wind up as a Shawn Bradley. Are there similarities? [...]
Charles Follymacher // January 28, 2008 at 5:45 am
I’ve been trying to keep my trap shut re Dorsey — wrt my fantasy pool buds, the less hype the better (for me).
I think Batum was left out in this review? I can’t get a bead on him. Help?
Ben Guest // January 28, 2008 at 6:58 am
Great post.
William // January 28, 2008 at 7:18 am
Outstanding, thanks for this post!
reservoirgod // January 28, 2008 at 8:32 am
I’ve seen footage of Kenny George and -while I agree that he’ll be drafted- he’ll last about as long as Gheorge Muresan. I hope he gets a guaranteed contract so he can resolve his health issues and help his family, but he just isn’t athletic enough to compete on a consistent basis with NBA talent. In the game against UNC, Tyler Hansborough made him look absolutely foolish. I thought he was going to collapse just running (and I use the term loosely) from one end of the floor to the other.
I watched some of USC vs. Oregon to get a glimpse of OJ Mayo -and I wasn’t impressed- but I do think his jumper is alot better than Telfair’s.
Dave,
Can you comment on how these College Win Scores project to the NBA, i.e. what would Beasley’s 9.67 PAWS look like in the NBA? Would it drop by 2-3 pts? 4-5 pts?
Animal // January 28, 2008 at 8:48 am
Excellent post. Thanks!
Clipfan // January 28, 2008 at 11:45 am
The assumption the Win Score in college will translate into success (measures by win score or otherwise) in the pros seems like an obvious gap in the article.
Kent // January 28, 2008 at 11:48 am
Clipfan, in baseball there are formulas to translate minor league performance to major league performance. For example, maybe 2/3 of home runs per at-bats at triple-a level can be expected at major league level. It could be the same thing here. In other words win score in college helps with relative rankings of players even if it would overstate NBA productivity if you just projected the college stats forward. An adjustment for the strength of schedule might help.
Overall I thought it was a very good article.
antonio // January 28, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Do you know how college players tend to translate to the pros? For example, Hollinger has a formula, where he gives more credit to “athletic markers”, such as steals, blocks, height and rebounds, that indicates to him a more likely chance of success. Do you have anything like that or do you just believe in general the player with the higher PAWS is more likely to have success at the NBA level
Kent // January 28, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Antonio, that sounds interesting. Did Hollinger backtest that (i.e. college steals/blocks/rebounds have higher correlation with NBA success than other college stats?)?
John G // January 28, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Hollinger did backtest for a few years, and the results came out similar to what he wanted going in.
Here’s the article: http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72515
Kent // January 28, 2008 at 3:00 pm
John G, thanks much for the link. He even makes a strength of schedule adjustment. Very cool.
antonio // January 28, 2008 at 3:11 pm
Obviously Hollinger’s system is not bullet proof, nor does he claim it to be. He would not use his rating system as a definite ranking of players, but what it does tend to do is weed many huge busts and also show players that were vastly underrated.
I don’t think Hollinger is making the argument that because one guy is ranked 4 and the other ranked 5, he is definitely the better prospect. It more just gives you an idea of where a prospect should be. And there are still some busts in his rankings as well.
antonio // January 28, 2008 at 3:11 pm
I meant to say weed out
Basketball » Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Animal // January 28, 2008 at 3:47 pm
[...] Animal wrote a fantastic post today on “Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Animal”Here’s ONLY a quick extractExcellent post. Thanks! [...]
Basketball » Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Clipfan // January 28, 2008 at 3:49 pm
[...] Clipfan wrote a fantastic post today on “Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Clipfan”Here’s ONLY a quick extractThe assumption the Win Score in college will translate into success (measures by win score or otherwise) in the pros seems like an obvious gap in the article. [...]
ty // January 28, 2008 at 5:48 pm
I would be cautious when it comes to Hansbrough.
I went back and looked at cases where players collegiate Win Scores dropped off by more than the standard one third when they entered the NBA. Almost all of them can be explained by either one of two physical limitations: (1) poor standing reach for their projected position (Shelden Williams, for instance at 8′8” could almost be considered a tall shooting guard by NBA standards — far shorter than his 6′8” measurements would indicate, and Danny Granger is another example); or (2) lack of weight/physical strength (Adam Morrison, Tyrus Thomas, Kevin Durant, and Marvin Williams). All of those players were too lanky to bang under the boards as they did in college.
Hansbrough appears to fit the latter mold — he looks strong but lacks the “junk in the trunk” necessary to establish himself under the boards. On the other hand, Kevin Love looks like the real deal, and they seem to grossly underrate him.
Erich // January 28, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Thanks for the interesting thoughts.
Charles, Batum is an international player and collecting stats for those guys is difficult. I’ll typically run the numbers for the internationals closer to the draft, as finding the stats becomes easier. If you like, supply a season stat line and we can apply win scores to it in order to get a rough idea.
Dave, I’m not a scout and I do realize that George may not project well from that kind of perspective, but the numbers he’s putting up are pretty sick. After the season, perhaps we can look back and do a full review on his performance against the stronger and weaker teams to see how he stacks up.
All apologies to Telfair, but I saw similarities in a low Win Score and a bevy of early hype.
As for the conversion to the NBA game, that is a difficult topic that I can only hope WoW2 addresses (please Dave!).
There’s plenty more room for improvement in college and international player assessment. First off, getting an adjustment for strength of schedule would be cool and a pace adjustment may improve accuracy. Furthermore, maybe information like Ty’s standing height or weight can be included. There’s plenty of room for growth in Win Score analysis for other levels of basketball.
dberri // January 28, 2008 at 7:20 pm
About the link between college and the NBA… I’m working on it. Really.
(not done yet, though)
John G // January 28, 2008 at 8:12 pm
With Hollinger, I always worry a bit because he seems to manipulate his work to reflect what he believes going in. However, I agree that it’s a useful tool simply because it makes an attempt to understand pro prospects as something more than a height and wingspan
N Ratner // January 28, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Funny that George was mentioned because there was a 5 min segment on him over the weekend when Asheville was playing. They briefly went over his numbers and spoke with the Coach where conditioning was the concern. Seeing footage is certainly impressive. They mentioned he was just recently dunked on…the first time since high school. I’ll be excited to see what kind of numbers provides this year.
Basketball » Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Basketball … // January 29, 2008 at 12:53 am
[...] Basketball » Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Clipfan wrote a fantastic post today on “Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Basketball …”Here’s ONLY a quick extractClipfan wrote a fantastic post today on “Comment on An Early Look at the 2008 NBA Draft by Clipfan”Here’s ONLY a quick extractThe assumption the Win Score in college will translate into success (measures by win score or otherwise) in … [...]
Eliot // January 29, 2008 at 12:56 am
Kenny George can literally fill up the paint by himself, he could be very valuable in the NBA if he can adjust to the speed and avoid fouling. He probably won’t have a long career though, but it will be cool to see another giant in the NBA if he makes it.
Underbruin // January 29, 2008 at 5:45 am
Unbelievable, the timing on this. I quite literally wrote, but did not post until after your entry (you = Erich), an analysis of USC’s team to date using Win Score. And I have my entry on Kevin Love and UCLA written with the plan to post it tomorrow. I *promise* I didn’t steal the idea – though I’d love it if you were to take a look.
*sigh* If only I’d been a bit quicker, I suppose. Anyway, great work as usual, and always a fascinating study.
Underbruin // January 29, 2008 at 6:05 am
Oh, almost forgot – this is for both Prof. Berri and Erich.
I corrected this in my calculations, and you might want to consider doing the same: college games are 40 minutes, not 48. When adjusting to ‘per-game’ scores like PAWS, I’d personally do it for 40 minutes for college players instead of 40 minutes. I know it creates a separation between college and pros, but as you’ve said, there’s a correction needed there anyway, so giving a more accurate per-game representation might not be a bad idea. Just a thought.
dberri // January 29, 2008 at 8:10 am
Underbruin,
The 48 minute thing was my fault. Erich had it as per-minute. But in talking about the NBA I was generally looking at per 48 minute performance. Of course that is wrong for the college game.
There is probably a lesson in all this (don’t touch Erich’s tables).
Underbruin // January 29, 2008 at 8:31 am
Gotcha. The reason I thought the difference between 40 and 48 minutes was important was because a team’s Win Score / 40 minutes seems to correlate pretty highly with that team’s total number of wins (of the half-dozen or so teams I tried it out on, it was never more than 1 win off – and for the 2006/2007 UCLA Bruins, the second team I checked, it was accurate to within .02 wins, which certainly caught my attention).
Erich // January 29, 2008 at 8:01 pm
Underbruin,
No worries on *stealing* material, I’m just really glad to see such interest in Win Scores. I look forward to what you can add to the discussion.
Something that didn’t make the cut was my AP poll predictions. Based on an off-the-cuff model, my conclusions were as follows:
With this measure, Kansas and North Carolina tower above the field while Tennessee comes in third. Furthermore, I’ve noticed some teams that rank high in this metric that aren’t in the polls. Keep an eye on underrated big conference teams such as Connecticut, Notre Dame, Florida, and Syracuse.
On the flip-side, the same metric is pessimistic on several ranked teams, including Dayton, Butler, Villanova, Stanford, and Marquette. Do not be surprised to see these teams slip.
An Instant Analysis of the NCAA Tournament « The Wages of Wins Journal // March 16, 2008 at 8:49 pm
[...] to investigate the top prospects for the 2007 NBA Draft. He also provided similar analysis in a first glance at the 2008 draft. In this post, Erich provides an analysis of who should be the favorites in the Big [...]
The 2008 NBA Draft Preview « The Wages of Wins Journal // May 27, 2008 at 9:28 pm
[...] an Early Look at the 2008 Draft, Michael Beasley was dominating both headlines and Win Scores. Nothing has changed. Beasley [...]
An Early Look at the 2009 NCAA Tournament and the 2009 NBA Draft « The Wages of Wins Journal // January 22, 2009 at 9:20 pm
[...] the season is half-over, prospects still have plenty of time to turn up their performances. By this time last season, Derrick Rose was still playing to the level of an average NCAA guard, whereas he turned on the [...]