|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 2:15:41 GMT
 So here we go again. Charles and I have adjusted a formula and settled on something we think we really like. It's basically the same idea: A formula that takes a players ratings and makes them into one number based on the letter grades. Remember, we are not getting inside information here, we do not know under the hood ratings. With this, and as we adjust maybe even further with age/height/weight potentially things will get more specific. So here is what we did: Bigs: Emphasis on inside and rebounding. Perimeter Players: Emphasis on outside scoring and defense SFs: Emphasis on rebounding as well as bonuses given to perimeter players. PGs: The only position that didn't get handles de-emphasized. As much as I think passing is absolutely worthless, point guards probably need their handles high. Otherwise, everyone got fewer points for having high handles ratings. SGs and PGs: Received a bonus for inside, very slight and quite a bit less than PFs and Cs got. This was due to the need for SGs and SFs to be more balanced of scorers than PGs need to be, but not quite as important to have inside as a big.Age: We did add a bit of a bonus for young players, although it wasn't huge and didn't change a whole lot except differentiate the top a bit more and flip-flopped some here and there. Basically, the top bonus you could get was 2.5 and it decreased by .5 from there. Seriously not a whole lot different after we applied this, it was just something I felt needed distinguished. Because of this, DO NOT compare these numbers to the first year and say this is a deeper draft, while potentially true, this data is not a reflection of that. Every season since then is comparable, with a slight improvement on SGs and SFs due to the inside bonus. Previous Versions: 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 Thoughts/Ramblings/Analysis - Going to do this kind quickly. Doing top 5 and then some other quick thoughts, nothing crazy since we're going post-draft. Coming in at number 1 with a respectable score of 68.15. He does have issues shooting the ball and he doesn't have pre-draft camps to back up any stats or ratings. He is a very solid, overall prospect. At number 2 is Puggy Bell with a 66.75 which is range with normal number 2 rated players here. Again, solid overall prospect including being a beast inside and rebounding. I'm not a huge fan of him, certainly not of with his outside scoring behind lower than even Barros. He also has defensive issues. And he's 22. Rough. Coming in at number 3 is another small forward Kahlil Whitney. I think I like him better than Puggy and even just as much as Barros. He is a year younger, similar ratings. He has the same issues too. At number 4 is the guy I think is the best prospect in the draft, Sam Jones. His name recognition, draft notes, and overall ratings make him an elite prospect. He looks great with his lack of issues on defense, solid shooting, and solid ball handling. He does show slight turnover issues and it will be interesting to see how he develops overall. Finally here rounding out the top 5 is Bastien Vautier. At 18 years old, nearly 7 feet, featuring B+ defense and rebounding Vautier is a resoundingly good defensive and rebounding prospect. However, he has C inside and C outside scoring which makes him not a top 10 prospect in my opinion. Another fascinating development to watch, but he is a lottery player, just not top 5 in my opinion. - I'd be remiss if I didn't mention Hal Greer here too, coming in at #8. He has amazing offensive ratings and absolutely dominated pre-draft camps, winning MVP and showing exactly no weaknesses. I think he'll show a bit of issue on defense and might turn it over a bit early on but I do think the Bulls made a very defendable choice taking him at number 1. - Probably the biggest discrepancy when it comes to where a guy was actually taken and where he is listed here, Redd Kerr came in at number 14 here. He looks like a great prospect, showing B- B- B+ big ratings and not having obvious weaknesses like free throws either. He showed well in pre-draft camps, even averaging 1 blocks per game, which is pretty solid but doesn't give a ton away about what he might end up averaging in terms of blocks in NBN. I like him as a prospect but him having B- defense and being a center who is 22 makes me think 14 is closer to correct than #3, but for the Hawks, I hope he got it right. - Finally, let's talk about the final big Hall of Famer from real life, Tom Heinsohn. Heinsohn is yet another small forward who went #5 to the Lakers in the actual draft. Heinsohn shows the same issues/strengths that Barros, Whitney, and Puggy have. Heinsohn went 5th purely on name value alone. That's not to say I don't like him, but I do. - Here we go with the bust and sleeper predictions. Again, not predicting them to bust or break out, I think these players are under or overvalued significantly enough to be mentioned due to any number of things, sometimes notes mostly. Inevitably someone is going to complain about this, but I've put my disclaimer and otherwise, you can fuck off. - Bust predictions: Puggy Bell at #2(Picked 7th, which is solid value), Bastien Vautier at #5(Picked 15, excellent value), and Tomiwa Sulaiman at #7(Picked #17 also solid value). - Sleeper predictions: Sam Jones at #4(Picked 2nd), Hal Greer at #8(picked 1st), and Meadowlark Lemon at #21(Picked #10). |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 2:19:19 GMT
A. Silver if you didn't make a guy with the name Meadowlark Lemon and absolute superstar I'm gonna be really disappointed. Just so you know. That would be a MAJOR missed opportunity.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 2:20:36 GMT
Also sorry its late guys, I'm not gonna lie... I have no desire to write right now. Haven't for weeks, its why the HOF articles just haven't come. I can't get the motivation to write. It'll come back, nothing to do with the league its just how I am. I love to write but every once in a while I just lose motivation to do it. So kept putting this off and it got away from me.
|
|
|
|
Post by pjclippers on Oct 3, 2018 2:42:32 GMT
Yeah was trying to wait on this before I picked but guess I made the right call with Ossola LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by verysilentone on Oct 3, 2018 2:48:20 GMT
Just out of curiosity, who would you have gone with at 5 in my position? I ask for your perspective, not a critique.
I would've gone Barros, but I didn't like the fact that he doesn't immediately come over. I hate the lost year overseas aspect of it. It's different when its the Gleague or they have notes that they can still be camped, since they get extra development, but for me, I don't like having a top 10 pick overseas.
I liked Lemon, Bercovich and Whitney and reading this it sounds like you'd go Whitney, but I'm interested to hear your opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 3:09:48 GMT
Just out of curiosity, who would you have gone with at 5 in my position? I ask for your perspective, not a critique. I would've gone Barros, but I didn't like the fact that he doesn't immediately come over. I hate the lost year overseas aspect of it. It's different when its the Gleague or they have notes that they can still be camped, since they get extra development, but for me, I don't like having a top 10 pick overseas. I liked Lemon, Bercovich and Whitney and reading this it sounds like you'd go Whitney, but I'm interested to hear your opinion. So two things 1) (From the perspective of where I wrote this article as) That read way more harsh than it meant to be. I think Heinsohn was a solid pick, like B or B+ level pick if I was grading. Probably better picks on the board, Lemon I really like but probably not the best pick at 5. Whitney is probably the best overall pick if you flat out refuse to go Barros who I think I would have gone there. 2) I'm even higher on Heinsohn right now than I was when I wrote this after looking harder. I thought Heinsohn was a SF, as stated in the in the article. Kind of why i didn't like him as much given there were a shit load of the can't shoot, slashing/rebounding small forwards in this draft. However he is a solid scoring power forward who comes in starting solid on the boards. If he was truly made as a PF(I wouldn't know w/o scouts), then he is a solid as fuck pick given his ratings and that he is a PF. So probably better than B or B+ that I said above. |
|
|
|
Post by bigthunder on Oct 3, 2018 3:25:18 GMT
Nice write up. Decided kinda late to buy a bunch of picks to stock my non-existent gleague team. Did we do well?
|
|
|
|
Post by verysilentone on Oct 3, 2018 3:38:00 GMT
So two things 1) (From the perspective of where I wrote this article as) That read way more harsh than it meant to be. I think Heinsohn was a solid pick, like B or B+ level pick if I was grading. Probably better picks on the board, Lemon I really like but probably not the best pick at 5. Whitney is probably the best overall pick if you flat out refuse to go Barros who I think I would have gone there. 2) I'm even higher on Heinsohn right now than I was when I wrote this after looking harder. I thought Heinsohn was a SF, as stated in the in the article. Kind of why i didn't like him as much given there were a shit load of the can't shoot, slashing/rebounding small forwards in this draft. However he is a solid scoring power forward who comes in starting solid on the boards. If he was truly made as a PF(I wouldn't know w/o scouts), then he is a solid as fuck pick given his ratings and that he is a PF. So probably better than B or B+ that I said above. Yeah, I liked Lemon closer to 8-15 range and if not for a lack of time, I would've traded back in for him in that range. I really did like Barros and without the year overseas, I would've gone there.
It seemed a bit harsh, but I understood where you where going with it, so I didn't take offense to it. By name alone, Heinsohn is definitely in the top 3. My main concern with him was somewhat low stocks in pre-draft which can't be a good sign when translating into the regular file. I'm hoping he's on the higher end of the potential grade given that in RL, he still put up good numbers even on those stacked teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by verysilentone on Oct 3, 2018 3:41:44 GMT
Either way great work again. I'm not sure if anyone else looked through the old versions, but it's awesome that in the early versions there was a guy in the 30s that turned into a stud.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 3:45:36 GMT
So two things 1) (From the perspective of where I wrote this article as) That read way more harsh than it meant to be. I think Heinsohn was a solid pick, like B or B+ level pick if I was grading. Probably better picks on the board, Lemon I really like but probably not the best pick at 5. Whitney is probably the best overall pick if you flat out refuse to go Barros who I think I would have gone there. 2) I'm even higher on Heinsohn right now than I was when I wrote this after looking harder. I thought Heinsohn was a SF, as stated in the in the article. Kind of why i didn't like him as much given there were a shit load of the can't shoot, slashing/rebounding small forwards in this draft. However he is a solid scoring power forward who comes in starting solid on the boards. If he was truly made as a PF(I wouldn't know w/o scouts), then he is a solid as fuck pick given his ratings and that he is a PF. So probably better than B or B+ that I said above. Yeah, I liked Lemon closer to 8-15 range and if not for a lack of time, I would've traded back in for him in that range. I really did like Barros and without the year overseas, I would've gone there.
It seemed a bit harsh, but I understood where you where going with it, so I didn't take offense to it. By name alone, Heinsohn is definitely in the top 3. My main concern with him was somewhat low stocks in pre-draft which can't be a good sign when translating into the regular file. I'm hoping he's on the higher end of the potential grade given that in RL, he still put up good numbers even on those stacked teams.
One thing to note is the difference in the leaderboards in pre draft and in the regular file for blocks. They don't seem to do well in the pre draft camps with the shitty players getting PT, similar happens in G-League to a lesser extent. Not to say Heinsohn will end up being good shot blocker or high stocks, but hard to judge from pre draft camps. |
|
|
|
Post by thefirstcedi on Oct 3, 2018 5:36:02 GMT
.1 bpg Jim Tucker is #20 because he has B handling as a big... Ok then.
|
|
|
|
Post by thefirstcedi on Oct 3, 2018 5:37:04 GMT
Neat idea but highly flawed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 12:55:51 GMT
.1 bpg Jim Tucker is #20 because he has B handling as a big... Ok then. Just gonna ignore his B inside and B rebounding? Handles are completely de-emphasized for all players beyond PGs. He doesn't get a big bonus for that B handles. |
|
|
|
Post by Rog on Oct 3, 2018 13:03:08 GMT
Neat idea but highly flawed. No matter how you do something, context is everything. You cant take the ratings from the player page and make a perfect system to judge them. It's not possible. A guy can have A- defense until he's blue in the face but if he's a big who doesn't and never gets blocks he's nearly worthless. But the player page just says A-. A guy can have B inside but if it's heavily invested to athletics while leaving little inside scoring, it doesn't mean much. We played with the formula a lot and this one we're on fit our idea better than anything else of what the top of the draft should look like. But the flaws in looking at just the player page ratings is why I include a bust and sleeper selection and give context in terms of my own opinions. Certain oddities of players(Puggy IMO) will throw things off but think it works well with the addition of context. |
|
|
|
Post by carmelo115 on Oct 3, 2018 13:04:37 GMT
After scouting i'm really happy I got rickets. think he can be a very good player
|
|
*
