NBA Draft 2012: Grades

by Ed Weiland

This draft is Anthony Davis followed by a whole lot of meh. There’s a lot of journeyman depth. There are a lot of decent prospects, but few good ones. For that reason the 2012 draft is a tough one to evaluate and grade. There will be some players who develop into rotation regulars and even stars though and I’m going to try and sort that out right here.

I grade on a curve. There will be 3 A’s, 6 B’s, 12 C’s, 6 D’s and 3 F’s. Grades are given based mainly on how much each team used their 2012 draft pick to improve their lot, with points deducted if they could have done better. Any team that adds John Shurna, Tony Mitchell or Ken Horton as an UFA, gets a + added to their grade.

A: New Orleans Hornets: Drafted Anthony Davis with their own pick. Drafted Austin Rivers with a pick acquired in the Chris Paul trade.  I’ve heard Duncan and Garnett mentioned as Davis comps, but the one I like is Olajuwon. Both Olajuwon and Davis were late to play center position. Both were quick learners. Olajuwon developed his legendary quickness playing soccer goalie. Davis’ quickness came from playing backcourt before the growth spurt. No matter which great he eventually most resembles, getting Anthony Davis is worth an A. This is such a solid A that the fact they reached wildly for Austin Rivers with the pick they got in exchange for trading away the franchise’s best ever player, Chris Paul, can’t bring it down.

A: LA Clippers: The Clippers won a couple of trades involving 2012 draft picks, so they get an A. Their own #1 was dealt back in 2010 for Eric Bledsoe. I would call that a net positive, as Bledsoe is a promising young guard and there wasn’t much better available at pick #22. They also held Minnesota’s #1 in the Marco Jaric trade. Jaric clearly isn’t missed. This pick was used as part of the package that brought Chris Paul to LA and made the team a contender. Trading a protected #1 is a gamble for both teams. The Clippers had two of those situations resolved in the 2012 draft and won both of them.

A: Houston Rockets: Drafted Jeremy Lamb, Royce White and Terrence Jones. One pick was theirs, one was acquired for Chase Budinger and one was acquired for Tracy McGrady. Dwight Howard is sort of hovering over these three picks. Reports are rampant that the Rockets horded picks with an eye on bringing Howard in. Whether they deal for Howard or not, I like what happened here. If the picks eventually bring Howard over, that’s a big win. If they just keep the players it isn’t a bad thing either. In a draft like the 2012 version, with every player being so even, quantity is better than quality. This was exactly how this draft should have been worked. By getting 3 picks and using them all on solid players, as opposed to overhyped former high school phenoms, the Rockets really upped their odds of making a big score in this draft. That I like all the players they drafted just makes the A that much more solid.

B: Orlando Magic: Drafted Andrew Nicholson. I love this pick. I know things are bad in Orlando now, but they definitely got one of the best hauls in this draft with Nicholson followed by Kyle O’Quinn in round 2. The future and whatever happens with the franchise player aside, the Magic got a couple of solid players here. That’s a good thing regardless of what else goes down this summer.

B: Denver Nuggets: Evan Fournier: I like the Nuggets, because they draft players I like. It was Lawson 3 years ago, Faried last year and now Fournier. I think they got another steal in Fournier. Add him to one of the best young cores in the league and the future is bright in Denver. Why is it that all the smart teams are in the West?

B: Washington Wizards: Bradley Beal: If the rumors were true and there was a trade on the table bringing Harden to DC straight up for the pick, the Wizards should have jumped. Harden would be a star in Washington. Beal is still something of a project, but is also one of the few players in the draft who is a better than average bet to become a solid player.

B: Dallas Mavericks: Traded pick for 3 later picks that became Jared Cunningham, Bernard James and Jae Crowder: I’m a big Crowder fan. I think the Mavs got a good one with him. What I like though is how they played the draft. This draft should have been about quantity and not quality. All players drafted after #10 were pretty even. Better to get three of them than one. The Mavs got three nice prospects.

B: Boston Celtics: Drafted Jared Sullinger and Fab Melo. Melo came in exchange for a pick that came to the Celtics in the Jeff Green for Kendrick Perkins deal. Sullinger is obviously a gamble, but with the 21^st pick there could be a big payoff. The Celtics have been good about getting production from big players drafted later in round one, so I expect both players to contribute something immediately. I don’t see where Melo will be an upgrade on what Perkins gave them, but he does have some potential as a defender and wasn’t a reach at 22.

B: Milwaukee Bucks: John Henson: What I like about Henson is he can come right in and help on the boards and eventually on defense. The Bucks need an inside grinder to go with their mad bombers in the backcourt and Henson was the best one available. That he will help right away gives the Bucks an edge.

C: Memphis Grizzlies: Tony Wroten: Good pick at this point. Wroten is a top 10 talent and there could be a huge payoff in a few years. If he doesn’t make it, all that’s lost is the 25^th pick in a weak draft. I also want to give them credit for using their #2 pick to acquire Marreese Speights, a young big with some potential. This was a good use of the draft by the Grizz.

C: Cleveland Cavaliers: Drafted Dion Waiters and Tyler Zeller. Zeller was acquired for 3 later draft picks. Sometimes the best trades are the ones you don’t make. By Charlotte turning down the rumored deal, the Cavs got more upside in Waiters and kept the 3 later picks. On the flip side, sometimes the worst trades are the ones you make. The Cavs were set to add 3 more decent pieces to their developing young core. Instead they dealt the three picks for the wildly over rated Tyler Zeller. Waiters should improve the team and might become a star. But it could have been a lot better.

C: Charlotte Bobcats: Michael Kidd-Gilchrist. MKG is a poor man’s Shane Battier at best. Regardless of what you might be hearing about Gilchrist, the truth is second fiddles in college rarely become superstars in the NBA. I doubt very much he’ll be an exception. They should have taken the offer from Cleveland and used the four picks. Charlotte’s best move was to scoop up as many picks as possible, so they could throw as many bodies as possible at the record setting  mess they put on the court last year.

C: Sacramento Kings: Thomas Robinson: Just so I got this straight, the Kings draft a weak defensively, inefficient scoring, rebounding machine to complement DeMarcus Cousins? Okay. At least they’ll be able to brag about leading the league in missed put backs. I like Robinson and have no problem with the value for the pick. It’s just that he seems like terrible fit on this team.

C: LA Lakers: Traded pick to Cleveland for Ramon Sessions: I have no problem with this use of a pick. A contender filled a gaping hole in their lineup by trading a late first round pick. That’s how to do it.

C: Portland Trail Blazers: Drafted Damian Lillard in a pick acquired for Gerald Wallace and drafted Meyers Leonard with their pick. A few things bother me about this. The first is getting Lillard for Wallace is a downgrade in talent. That’s never good. The next is both picks are wild reaches. Granted there wasn’t much available here, but they could have done better. Finally, they needed a point guard and Lillard is more of a combo. I don’t see him making the quick transition from small college gunner to starting NBA point guard. Leonard is a huge project. He’s unlikely to see much court time right away and possibly ever. I do like that they got Will Barton in round 2.

C: Golden State Warriors: Harrison Barnes: My feelings on Barnes have been noted. I think he’ll be a bust. The Warriors started out with an F. Then they argued their case. In their favor is they snagged the 30^th pick from San Antonio for taking on Richard Jefferson’s contract. Good move. They got Festus Ezeli with that pick. In round two Draymond Green was not only a steal, but a will be a great fit here. They also grabbed Bosnia and Herzegovina center Ojngen Kuzmic which is another steal. They’ll regret the Barnes pick, but recovered enough that I can give them a C.

C: Oklahoma City Thunder: Perry Jones III: OKC is a good place for Jones. The culture is positive. He doesn’t need to contribute immediately. If he does learn to be a more aggressive player, the payoff could be big. I don’t expect much from Jones, but if he’s going to become anything near the player he was advertised as, this is a good place for that to happen.

C: Chicago Bulls: Marques Teague: What I said for Jones and OKC applies here also. I just find it strange that a team with the best PG in the game would draft another one. I know Rose will be out until the all-star break, but Teague isn’t ready to step in as the starting PG anywhere, even as a stopgap, let alone on a contender.

C: Miami Heat: Traded pick to Philadelphia in exchange for a future pick. Good move by the champs. There wasn’t much help at #27 and they didn’t need to waste the cap space paying whoever they drafted. They get what will likely become a better pick in the future when it will definitely be of more use to them. Thanks a lot for helping these guys out, Philly.

C: Brooklyn Nets: Traded pick for Gerald Wallace. A lot depends on whether Wallace comes back. Wallace is a solid NBA player who helps any team. He’s well worth the 6^th overall pick in this draft. Wallace has opted out of his contract, so the Nets may get nothing for the pick. The good news is a pick from 2-10 in the 2012 draft is likely going to cost a team more than it’s worth. The bad thing is the Nets continue to look incompetent in their efforts to become a contender.

C: Detroit Pistons: Andre Drummond: Detroit seems like the wrong place for Drummond. They’re a rebuilding team and such teams need to hit on their draft picks. Drafting a player who is 3 years away just doesn’t seem like a good strategy. There will be more pressure on Drummond in a place like Detroit than he would have seen on a contender. He’s a long shot for success anywhere and his failure will only be magnified if it happens on a bad team.

D: Philadelphia 76ers: Drafted Moe Harkless with their own pick, then traded the #45 overall pick and a future 1^st rounder to the Heat for Arnett Moultrie. Harkless is a reach here. But that isn’t my main issue with the Sixers. I can’t understand dealing the future #1 for Arnett Moultrie. Forget that Moultrie was also a reach. Forget that helping out Mimai isn’t something any team should be doing. This is about value. They picked up the 27^th pick in a bad draft for what will likely be a higher pick in a stronger draft. They gave up value and that just isn’t a smart way for a team to operate.

D: Utah Jazz: Traded pick for Darius Songalia as best I can tell. Obviously that didn’t work out too well. The Jazz have some good young players and the Warriors’ #1 pick next year. They’ll recover from this.

D: Toronto Raptors: Terrence Ross: This is was a reach. But they can be thankful Barnes didn’t slip to them. This is where I’m going to list the picks I considered to be the wildest reaches.

D: Phoenix Suns: Kendall Marshall: Not a bad time to bring in a young PG, but Marshall is also a reach.

D: Atlanta Hawks: John Jenkins: Big reach. Jenkins is nothing more than a gunner. There were some good players on the board here. Gunners like Doron Lamb and Marcus Denmon were available in round 2. They were better values and might become better players.

D: Indiana Pacers: Miles Plumlee: I didn’t expect him to be drafted, let alone in round one. This is the craziest reach of the night. They drafted a guy who is basically a rebounding specialist.

F: Minnesota Timberwolves: The original pick went to the Clippers and eventually the Hornets in the Chris Paul trade in exchange for Marco Jaric. They owned Utah’s pick that they landed for Darius Songalia, I think. What they got was Chase Budinger for the Utah pick and a nice score in round two with Robbie Hummel. The Jaric trade is unforgivable and gets them the F. Considering Kahn’s drafting record, dealing the pick for an established player like Budinger was probably smart.

F: San Antonio Spurs: Traded pick to Golden State in order to dump the contract of Richard Jefferson. I’m not sure they deserve an F, but it’s fun to flunk the goody-two-shoes valedictorian and I’m going to do it when the opportunity presents itself. The disappointing thing is the Spurs would have killed it with a late first rounder in a draft like this. They grabbed a useful player, Marcus Denmon, in round 2 of course.

F: NY Knicks: Traded pick for Tracy McGrady: The good thing for the Knicks is they own all their draft picks for the next few years and have a solid roster so they may not feel the need to keep trading protected #1s.

NBA Draft 2012: Top 60 (Not a mock draft)

by Ed Weiland

This is not a mock draft. Mocks suggest some inside knowledge of how the draft will transpire. I have no such knowledge other than what I might read here and there. This is the order of how I would draft this group of players.

This is an incredibly difficult bunch to rank after the top pick. After Davis every player has major concerns and isn’t a guy I’d want in the top 2-10 of most drafts. What this draft does have going for it is what I’ll call journeyman depth. There will be players available well into round two who look like they can become decent journeymen. That means the teams with the best chance to make a big score, other than the Hornets, are the teams with multiple picks after #10.

The previous draft that this one best compares to is 1969. That one had Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (Lew Alcindor at the time) at the top and not much after that. Draft picks like Bobby Dandridge, JoJo White, Norm Van Lier and Bingo Smith eventually emerged as solid NBA players as I expect a few drafted after Davis to.

1. Anthony Davis PF-C, Kentucky: The sky is the limit for Davis. Everything about him says he’ll become a legendary player.
2. Dion Waiters G, Syracuse: Someone has to be #2. I went with Waiters because of upside. He has star ability and might even be able to play some point. In 5 years it might seem really silly to have Waiters at #2, but I suspect most other current mocks will look just as silly. Know that the gap between Davis and Waiters is greater than the gap between Waiters and Jesse Sanders at #60.
3. Andrew Nicholson PF, St. Bonaventure: I don’t envy teams drafting in spots 2-5. Nicholson seems like a reach here and he is. But other than Davis he was the best big guy in the nation for the final 3 months of the season. That’s why I have him ahead of Robinson.
4. Thomas Robinson PF, Kansas: He reminds me of Jordan Hill from a few years ago. Like Hill his numbers scream journeyman despite that high-revvin’  motor of his.
5. Brad Beal SG, Florida:  Beal would be the safe choice at #2. I feel he’ll become a pretty good SG, possibly a borderline all-star. I’m just leery about using too high a draft pick on any SG other than a Wade or Kobe clone.
6. Evan Fournier SG, France: What can I say here other than I love his stats. He’s young, tall and has great production.
7. John Henson PF, North Carolina: The appeal of Henson is that there aren’t many concerns about what he will and won’t be able to accomplish. He’ll be a solid rebounder and defender who struggles on offense.
8. Michael Kidd-Gilchrist SF, Kentucky: He’s a hard guy to figure. There isn’t anything here that says he’ll become an impact player. But his situation may have suppressed his numbers.
9. Terrence Jones F, Kentucky: My opinion of Jones has risen quite a bit throughout this process. When it started I considered him a somewhat overmatched PF. Now I see a multi-skilled forward who could be effective at either position off the bench.

10.  Andre Drummond C, Connecticut: A talented big guy can’t last too long, no matter how far away he is from contributing.

11.  Jeremy Lamb SG, Connecticut

12.  Tony Wroten G, Washington: Draft him, hope he works hard and becomes something similar to Chauncey Billups in a few years. Wroten does possess that type of ability. What must scare the people who actually have to make these decisions is the same thing could have been said about Javaris Crittenton a few years back.

13.  Will Barton SG, Memphis

14.  Jae Crowder SF, Marquette: I’ve been on his bandwagon all year and I’m not going to bail because of a silly measurement.

15.  Jared Sullinger PF, Ohio State: I’d have him in the top 5 if not for the red flag.

16. Royce White F, Iowa State

17. Terrence Ross SG, Washington: I don’t like the idea of two players from the same non-tournament team going in the top 20, but such is life with the 2012 draft class. Everything is a crapshoot after #1.

18. Fab Melo C, Syracuse: A raw center who blocks shots is never a terrible investment.

19. Draymond Green F, Michigan State

20. Damian Lillard G, Weber State

21. Kendall Marshall PG, North Carolina

22. Ognjen Kuzmic C, Bosnia and Herzegovina

23. John Shurna SF, Northwestern

24. Marquis Teague PG, Kentucky

25. Tony Mitchell SF, Alabama

26. Ken Horton SF, Central Connecticut State

27. Moe Harkless SF, St John’s: My gut tells me he should go higher, but I don’t listen to my gut much. He’s an athletic, but small and overmatched PF trying to play SF. That just isn’t a great prospect.

28.  Harrison Barnes SF, North Carolina: I’ve been debating plugging him in since about #15. That’s the “what if the others are right?” voices in my head talking. Barnes just doesn’t rate very well as a prospect and this is where I feel he belongs. What Barnes, Jones III, Rivers and some others have going in their favor is they’re going to be drafted high and will get every opportunity to succeed or fail. Most players won’t be that fortunate.

29. Quincy Miller SF, Baylor

30. Perry Jones III F, Baylor

31. Meyers Leonard C, Illinois

32. Scott Machado PG, Iona

33. Marcus Denmon SG, Missouri

34. Kyle O’Quinn C, Norfolk State

35. JaMychal Green PF, Alabama

36. Herb Pope PF, Seton Hall

37. Orlando Johnson SG, UCSB

38. Mitchell Watt PF, Buffalo

39. Robbie Hummel SF, Purdue

40. Arnett Moultrie PF, Mississippi State

41. Dusan Cantekin C, Serbia

42. Tyshawn Taylor G, Kansas

43. Kostas Papnikolaou SF, Greece

44. Festus Ezeli C, Vanderbilt

45. Doron Lamb SG, Kentucky

46. Jeff Taylor SF, Vanderbilt

47. Ricardo Ratliffe PF, Missouri

48. Scoop Jardine PG, Syracuse

49. Jared Cunningham SG, Oregon State

50. Drew Gordon PF, New Mexico

51. Tyler Zeller C, North Carolina

52. Austin Rivers SG, Duke

53. Bernard James C, Florida State

54. Kevin Jones F, West Virginia

55. Garrett Stutz C, Wichita State

56. John Jenkins SG, Vanderbilt

57. Cameron Moore PF, UAB

58. Miles Plumlee PF-C, Duke

59. Quincy Acy PF, Baylor

60. Jesse Sanders PG, Liberty

NBA Draft 2012: Centers

by Ed Weiland

The evaluation of the centers plays out something like the PFs. There are benchmarks that should be met before I consider them good prospects. There are exceptions and I’ll get into those as they apply. The main thing to know is the 2PP should be over .600, the R40 over 10.0 and the B40 over 3.0. Those are minimum numbers. The better prospects should do better in every category. Scoring frequently is nice, but not as important as it is with the other position. Possessing a 3-point shot and good passing skills never hurt, but neither skill is essential for success. Here are the numbers:

Player	2PP	P40	R40	B40	A/TO
Festus Ezeli	539	17.4	10.2	3.5	0.1
Eli Holman	607	18.1	11.7	2.2	0.7
Bernard James	606	15.3	11.5	3.3	0.2
Meyers Leonard	604	17.6	10.6	2.4	0.6
Fab Melo	566	12.3	9.2	4.6	0.5
Kyle O’Quinn	610	19.7	12.8	3.2	0.5
Henry Sims	463	17.0	8.8	2.0	1.2
Garrett Stutz	572	21.4	12.9	1.7	0.5
Tyler Zeller	553	21.6	12.7	2.0	0.5

Like the entire 2012 draft after the top pick, this group is deep with players who will make good 2^nd round picks, but offer little to like if drafted in the top 20. This group includes some typical center prospect stereotypes. Zeller’s the 4-year guy from a major program that every fan has heard about. Ezeli is the guy coming off a terrible senior year who might be a bargain. Leonard is the young guy with potential. Melo is the shot blocker. Kuzmic is the mysterious foreign player who may not show up until 2015. Etc. But they’re a bunch of players who will be 2^nd or 3^rd stringers in the NBA at best. Anthony Davis and Andre Drummond have already been analyzed in separate pieces. Davis is the top center available by a long shot. Drummond would be next based on his potential. Players are listed in order of how I would draft them, all other things being equal.

Fab Melo, Syracuse: Melo is a good shot blocker. If there’s one skill I would choose for center prospects to do, blocking shots would be it. Such players have a much higher success rate than other one-skill prospects. For that reason I’m going to put him at the top of this group. Please don’t interpret this as a ringing endorsement of Melo’s NBA future either. He’s merely the most promising of a somewhat motley group of center prospects. Someone has to be at the top. I like shot blockers, so Fab is my guy.

There isn’t much else to like here though. He’s a substandard rebounder, his offense is practically non-existent and he’s a sophomore who’s as old as most seniors. He probably shouldn’t be drafted before #20. But if the question is “Which of these centers would I take first?” my answer would be Fab Melo. The reason is because he has the potential to become a pretty good NBA defender.

Ognjen Kuzmic, Bosnia and Herzegovina: Kuzmic averaged 14.1 R40 and 3.5 B40 playing in Spain. Those are numbers that make me take notice. His offense is weak, but in this group of centers his rebounding/defense places him near the top. I read a report that he signed a 4-year contract with a team in Spain. If this is true it means he won’t be of much immediate help. The flip side of this is he could be stashed overseas while salary cap and roster issues resolve themselves on a playoff contender.

Meyers Leonard, Illinois: Leonard seems likely to be one of the first of this group taken, so he deserves a closer look. Since I like to compare players with similar players from the past as a way of evaluating them, here’s a look at Leonard against past sophomore centers with a 2PP close to his .604. That’s his strongest stat, so that’s the one I used.

NCAA Sophomore	2PP	P40	R40	B40
Hakeem Olajuwon	611	20.3	16.7	7.5
Cole Aldrich	598	19.7	14.6	3.6
Tim Duncan	594	18.4	13.7	4.6
Bryant Reeves	622	24.0	12.3	1.6
Kevin Willis	596	16.7	11.9	1.6
Joel Przybilla	613	18.3	10.7	5.1
Michael Southall	610	18.3	10.7	3.6
Randolph Morris	608	21.8	9.8	1.9
Jason Lawson	595	17.9	9.3	3.6
Steve Hamer	595	21.6	9.0	1.6
Bill Wennington	605	11.1	8.9	1.9
Olden Polynice	603	15.2	8.9	1.3
Brad Daugherty	610	15.4	8.1	1.4
Dave Hoppen	599	22.6	7.8	0.5
Meyers Leonard	604	17.6	10.6	2.4

I listed the players in order of rebound rate, because there seems to be a dividing line between 10-11 R40 for players who were more successful. That line will become more defined next year after Cole Aldrich has his break out season. As for Leonard, he’s on the line. The three successful players below 10.5, Wennington, Polynice and Daugherty all posted their numbers in the pre-shot clock era, so I’m wary about holding up their careers as something Leonard might emulate. Leonard looks kind of ordinary next to this group. His numbers are similar to Przybilla only if you ignore blocks, which I can’t.

I have to consider Leonard a longshot to become more than a reserve. It looks like he has decent offensive potential, but the defense/rebounding skills are marginal and that has always been more important for centers. I could see using a late first rounder on him, because he’s younger than most and offers some upside. Personally I would wait for round 2.

Kyle O’Quinn, Norfolk State: O’Quinn is the only player here who passes every statistical benchmark, so I have to give him props for that. This is not an easy thing to do and it says O’Quinn is a prospect who deserves to be drafted. The fact that he’s posted such numbers for three years now and has flashed a decent 3-point shot adds to his value.

What brings him down a notch or two is that these numbers were posted at a small college. That isn’t as impressive had he done this on a bigger stage. That reservation aside, O’Quinn looks like a good get in round two. He has shown ability offensively, defensively and on the boards. He has enough potential that his ceiling is that of a decent rotation player.

Dusan Cantekin, Serbia: Cantekin hit 63% of his shots and posted an 11.8 R40 playing for Mega Vizura this past season. He’s also 7’4”. He didn’t look like much of a shot blocker and he’s 22, so the upside isn’t there. He doesn’t look like he’ll become a productive player on the level of Pekovic or Asik, but there’s enough here that he merits a second round look.

Festus Ezeli, Vanderbilt: Rough year for Ezeli. He was one of the top center prospects going in, but a suspension and injuries brought his numbers way down. This table shows how far he fell from last year:

Festus Ezeli	2PP	P40	R40	B40	A/TO
2010-11	588	22.1	10.7	4.4	0.1
Nov-Dec	471	18.0	11.3	2.0	0.0
January	468	14.1	11.8	4.4	0.3
February	619	21.8	6.4	3.9	0.1
March	526	15.1	13.2	2.2	0.2

Even though he was a better player in 2011, he was still just a marginal prospect because of his scary low A/TO. He’s even more marginal following a rough senior year. In his defense, Ezeli did improve after a late start, but never really got it together. He also still has that turnover problem that makes him seem too mistake-prone to have much of an impact at the next level. His defense should get him a look late in round 2.

Tyler Zeller, North Carolina: When a draft is thin at the top like 2012, marginal prospects are more likely to stand out in combines and individual workouts as teams desperately search for help. I think that’s probably the reason Zeller has moved close to the lottery in the latest mocks. Or perhaps teams are hoping that drafting Tyler somehow gives them an edge on landing his younger brother Cody next year. Whatever the reason, it certainly isn’t because he’s been a dominant college center. While he has shown some improvement, this is the first year he’s posted any number that made him look like even a decent prospect.

Tyler Zeller	2PP	P40	R40	B40
Freshman	472	15.3	9.7	0.9
Sophomore	521	20.6	10.1	1.9
Junior	547	21.2	9.8	1.6
Senior	553	21.6	12.7	2.0

I’m always somewhat suspicious of players who finally step up as seniors. It’s better than not stepping up at all, but the best prospects are there from the start more often than not. In the case of Zeller, he only stepped up his rebounding. His offense remains inefficient and his shot blocking is still poor. Tyler Zeller has the numbers of a late 2^nd-rounder at best. Drafting him in round one, let alone the lottery would be a major mistake.

Bernard James, Florida State: James is a nice story. He served in Iraq, during which time he grew from 6’5” to 6’10”. After the army he headed to junior college, then Florida State as their starting center for the past couple of seasons. He’s 27, which makes him older than 8-year NBA veterans Dwight Howard and Al Jefferson. That means even if he does make it, his usefulness as a player has a very tight window.

His stats were better as a junior when he averaged only 21 minutes per game. Increasing his minutes by 33% hurt both his efficiency and production and that has to be considered a pretty big negative. The positive side of his ledger is that he’s probably more mature than most of this group, what with the life experiences he’s had. He’s good enough to be an end of the bench big guy, so a late round 2 pick is about his place.

Garrett Stutz, Wichita State: He flashed some talent for 3 years, but put things together nicely as a senior and got himself on the map as a prospect. Stutz has a nice outside shot, which is always a plus for a big. He’s also a decent enough rebounder and has shown some good passing skills during his career. One big negative is he had trouble staying on the court. His senior number of 24.6 minutes per game was by far the best of his career, despite the fact that he didn’t foul at a high rate and generally posted strong per minute numbers. It bothers me that he spent so much time on the bench. Just looking at per minute numbers, he’s a better prospect than Zeller. But the fact that he posted these numbers in low minutes brings him down a few notches. He has shown enough to merit a look.

Eli Holman, Detroit: Holman has some big negatives, like being only 6’8”, being a 5^th-year senior and exceeding 3.0 B40 only in his sophomore season. He does have 3 seasons over 60% on 2-pointers, is a solid rebounder and has a 7’4” wingspan. He doesn’t look like much other than another big body to have around as a 3^rd string big. Rates a look as a UFA, but that’s all.

Henry Sims, Georgetown: Sims’ numbers are terrible for a prospect. I include him for a couple of reasons. The first is he’s a very good passer. That’s a nice skill for a center to have. The next is Georgetown big men under Thompson III may be experiencing a similar phenomenon to guards playing for Ben Howland at UCLA where the system suppresses their numbers. Both Roy Hibbert and Greg Monroe have outplayed their college stats. Sims could do the same. Because Sims is nowhere near the player Hibbert and Monroe were in college, I’d test this theory via the UFA route.

NBA Draft2012: Anthony Davis

by Ed Weiland

I’m going to look at Anthony Davis with the idea that he’s going to play more center than PF, even though he’s listed as a PF. He’s over 6’10” in shoes and has a 7’5” wingspan. He has little in the way of a perimeter game and his main skill is blocking shots. All those things add up to Anthony Davis playing more center than PF. The only issue would be his slight frame. At 222 lb he’ll have to add some weight. Because he’s young and has already handled a legendary growth spurt with little, if any, loss in quickness and athleticism, my guess is that he can put on 30 lbs or so without losing effectiveness.

Now that I got my thoughts on his eventual NBA position out of the way, it’s time to evaluate Davis. Honestly he’s the best prospect I’ve seen since 2007 when Durant vs. Oden was a legitimate debate. There hasn’t been a big guy in the last 3 decades who was this good as a freshman. Davis is the first freshman I can find since Olajuwon who topped a .600 2 point pct, 12.0 R40 and 5.0 B40.  Here is Davis compared with the best NBA centers of recent years in their freshman seasons:

NCAA Freshmen	2PP	P40	R40	B40
Anthony Davis	653	17.4	12.7	5.7
Tim Duncan	543	13.0	12.7	5.0
Hakeem Olajuwon	607	18.2	13.5	5.4
Shaquille O’Neal	573	19.8	17.1	5.1
Alonzo Mourning	609	18.6	10.3	7.0
Patrick Ewing	631	17.6	10.5	4.5

He stacks up very well with this group. It’s obviously early in his career, but Davis is right there with the best ever. Not many players ever have been able to say that. This is what makes him special and is why there has been practically no debate over who will go #1.

I also wanted to compare Davis to the most prolific college shot blockers of the past. Here are centers not from the first table who also topped 5.0 B40 in their freshman years.

NCAA Freshmen	2PP	P40	R40	B40
Anthony Davis	653	17.4	12.7	5.7
Shawn Bradley	517	20.5	10.7	7.2
Jim McIlvaine	579	16.8	9.9	6.9
Samuel Dalembert	503	11.1	11.1	6.7
Alvin Jones	500	8.9	8.8	5.6
Jamaal Magliore	490	12.5	11.3	5.1

I put this up to show that Anthony Davis is much more than just a skinny shot blocker. He’s also a very good rebounder and an ultra-efficient scorer. He doesn’t have the low 2PP or R40 that these others did.

One more table. This is Davis compared with freshman PFs. There just weren’t a lot of freshmen PFs who topped 5.0 B40, so I expanded the list to include those who topped 3.0 B40 along with .600 2PP and 12.0 R40:

NCAA Freshmen	2PP	P40	R40	B40
Anthony Davis	653	17.4	12.7	5.7
Chris Webber	601	19.5	12.5	3.1
Rasheed Wallace	607	18.2	12.7	3.4
Tyrus Thomas	606	19.1	14.2	4.8
Brian Skinner	598	18.8	11.7	5.5

Webber and Wallace both had great careers, but Davis could top them both. The big difference between Skinner and Davis at this point is Skinner had a big problem with turnovers, whereas Davis had a turnover rate that is extremely low. Ty Thomas is a good addition to the list, because he’ll forever be an example that anything can happen when we’re discussing NCAA freshmen. Any player’s career arc is wide at this point. Ty Thomas represents the low end of that arc for Anthony Davis. The players in the first table represent the high end. It’s important to mention that with any player there is a chance of failure no matter how stellar he looks as a freshman. The small chance of Davis becoming a bust does need to be mentioned, but shouldn’t be the focus here. Ty Thomas was an outlier. He was an outlier with a bad attitude who didn’t like being coached at that. All reports on Davis are that he’s well-equipped mentally and emotionally to handle NBA stardom.

Now that I’ve done the comps, I’d like to break this down a little more.

Defense: Davis has the potential to become a great defensive player in the NBA. I would go so far as to say I expect him to challenge for Defensive POY for most of his career. As an NCAA freshman he blocked shots at a rate few have ever matched. He was the backbone of the best defense in the nation. He brings a 7’5” wingspan, so he can play taller than his height would suggest. There is little not to like here. The only worry I could see is his size. He weighs just 222 and the concern would be that he’ll get pushed around by bigger, stronger NBA centers. As I mentioned in the first paragraph, he has already handled a growth spurt well, so I doubt putting on the necessary weight and muscle will hinder him too much. It is something to note though.

Offense: Davis is still a very raw player on offense. He takes few jump shots. Almost all of his points come from dunks and put backs. He is a very efficient, low-mistake player. He rarely misses a shot and has a turnover rate that ranks among the lowest ever. There is a lot of potential for improvement here. Davis hit 65% of his 2-point shots. If this were an easy thing to do, more players would do it. The fact that Davis is one of the select few to ever hit that figure tells me the ceiling for him as an offensive player is pretty high. Keep in mind that he’s 19 and the center position is fairly new to him. Considering his physical gifts, I find it hard to believe that he won’t develop at least some sort of offensive arsenal. At best he’ll use his elite athleticism to develop an effective offensive game and become an efficient 20-25 PPG center.

Intangibles: This also appears to be a huge positive for him. I mean the guy is so likeable he actually had me happy Kentucky won the championship. By all accounts he brings a positive attitude and great work ethic. I see no reason to think he’ll get lazy or cop a bad attitude. But stuff can happen when wealthy young men are involved. It’s the nature of the beast. But right now everything I’ve seen and read about Anthony Davis says he’s a solid citizen.

The sky is the limit for Anthony Davis. At worst he’s a great NBA defender and a low-mistake player who doesn’t hinder a team on offense. At best he develops an effective offensive game and by his 4^th year he’s pumping in an efficient 20-25 PPG, finishing in the top 10 in rebounds and blocks while challenging for the defensive POY award. That’s a perennial MVP candidate and that’s where I believe Anthony Davis is headed.

NBA Draft 2012: Power Forwards

by Ed Weiland

I like analyzing power forwards. In general they’re an easy, low maintenance bunch. Unlike the small forwards, there isn’t a lot of nuance. It’s fairly simple. If a player can score efficiently, rebound and defend at the college level, he’s a good prospect. If he can’t, he isn’t.

The benchmarks are fairly simple for PFs. If a player posts a 2PP of .580, a P40 of 18.0, a R40 of 10.0 and a SB40 of 3.5, he’s a solid prospect. If he pushes the 2PP over .600, the R40 over 12.0 and the SB40 over 4.0, he’s a likely all-star. It also helps if there’s no turnover problem. The ability to hit a 3-pointer has never been essential for a PF. But the league is changing. Players like Ryan Anderson have become very productive pros using the 3-pointer as the main weapon in their arsenal. I expect such players to become more frequent, which means going forward any ability a PF prospect can show to hit an outside shot should be considered a huge plus. Here are the numbers:

Player	2PP	3PP	P40	R40	SB40	A/TO
Thomas Robinson	505	500	21.9	14.6	2.4	0.7
Jared Sullinger	531	400	22.8	12.0	2.9	0.7
Andrew Nicholson	593	434	24.3	11.1	3.5	0.4
Arnett Moultrie	555	444	18.5	11.8	1.8	0.5
Miles Plumlee	610	0	12.7	13.6	2.8	0.4
John Henson	500	0	17.5	12.7	4.4	1.0
JaMychal Green	561	200	19.5	10.3	3.1	0.7
Mitchell Watt	580	324	20.9	9.7	3.6	0.9
Ricardo Ratliffe	693	0	21.5	11.5	2.5	0.4
Drew Gordon	539	1	17.7	14.3	3.4	0.6
Cameron Moore	499	217	18.5	12.1	3.4	0.6
Quincy Acy	576	600	16.0	9.9	3.7	0.5

I didn’t include Anthony Davis. He gets his own piece tomorrow and he might be more of a center anyways. This group is deep, but not great. The top 4 are players that ideally would fall in the 7-14 range in most drafts. The rest are players that a team should be happy about getting in round 2. I wasn’t impressed enough with the foreign PFs to include any. They just can’t rebound over there this year. Players are listed in order of how I would draft them all other things being equal.

Andrew Nicholson, St. Bonaventure: For 3 seasons Andrew Nicholson had been one of those players on my watch list. His stats were good enough to get a place on my spreadsheet, but not good enough that I ever considered him much of a prospect. He was a good scorer, but didn’t rebound that well and hadn’t been much of a defender since his freshman year. When the calendar turned 2012, something happened with Nicholson’s game that not even the Mayans could have foreseen:

Andrew Nicholson	2PP	3PP	P40	R40	SB40	A/TO
Freshman	602	0	19.1	9.2	5.0	0.1
Sophomore	564	0	21.3	9.2	2.7	0.3
Junior	589	261	24.4	8.5	2.3	0.3
Sr: Nov-Dec	544	167	19.9	9.6	2.7	0.3
Sr: Jan-March	619	512	26.9	11.9	4.0	0.5

On 12/31/2011, Andrew Nicholson was in the middle of an uneventful senior season, well on his way to the D-league. On that night he must have cut a deal with the Mayan god Kisin and became the best basketball player in the nation not named Anthony Davis for the final 3 months. I look forward to 12/21/12 when we all find out whether Kisin will want Nicholson’s soul or just a couple of courtside seats in return.

Most impressive is that the improvement came during the conference season when the vast majority of players see their stats decline. Less impressive is that it took this long for him to get there. There haven’t been too many seniors who put up such numbers. Most players who are this good depart for the NBA well before their senior seasons. Here are a few guys who stuck around 4 seasons and topped .600, 25.0 and 11.0 for the entire season, matching what Nicholson did from January on:

Player	2PP	P40	R40	SB40
Alan Henderson	605	26.7	11.1	3.5
Horace Grant	657	25.8	11.8	2.4
Michael Harris	637	25.4	14.4	3.1
Andrew Nicholson	619	26.9	11.9	4.0

Grant was an all-star and an integral piece on several championship teams, Henderson a journeyman and Harris too short. Nicholson doesn’t have the height problem that plagued Harris, so he looks like at least a solid journeyman if the Jan-March stats are an accurate reflection of the real Andrew Nicholson that is.

The question that has to be asked is what triggered this sudden improvement? If it was a case of Nicholson working harder, will he continue with the same hard work that improved his game? Or will he revert to the habits that led to his ordinary first three seasons once he signs the contract? If it was just a case of him playing harder, that makes him something of a flake who may not always give it his all. Or maybe he just matured as a player and figured out a few things that made him more productive. If that’s the case, the Andrew Nicholson we saw from the start of 2012 is the real thing and that makes him a pretty good prospect.

Not counting Anthony Davis, who might be more of a center anyways, Andrew Nicholson is the top PF prospect in the 2012 draft. The reason I like him better than Robinson or Sullinger is that at his best, Nicholson was a more dominant player both offensively and defensively. He definitely comes with some risk and concerns, but drafting on upside, I have to put Nicholson at the top.

Thomas Robinson, Kansas: Robinson’s stock has risen throughout the season and the pre-draft process to the point that he’s almost the consensus #2 selection a few days before the draft. Looking at his stats, he’s a one-trick pony, that trick being rebounding, who seems likely to disappoint if drafted that high. But in a draft with a huge void after the top pick, Robinson might still be a solid selection at #2.

First thing to do is look at the stats and see where he stands. Here are similar college players who experienced some NBA success. I looked for players who had a 2PP around 50% and were good rebounders.

Player	2PP	P40	R40	SB40	A/TO
Sophomore
Antonio McDyess	514	21.3	15.6	4.7	0.3
Antoine Walker	493	22.5	12.4	3.5	1.2
Leon Powe	500	23.2	11.5	1.6	0.6
Junior
Drew Gooden	523	26.4	15.2	4.2	0.7
Jerome Williams	515	14.3	13.2	2.1	0.5
Thomas Robinson	505	21.9	14.6	2.4	0.7
Senior
PJ Brown	500	17.0	13.2	4.5	0.7
Reggie Evans	497	18.4	13.3	2.5	0.5
Chuck Hayes	522	14.9	10.6	3.9	1.2
Ronny Turiaf	513	20.4	12.2	2.9	0.7
Tony Massenberg	507	22.9	12.9	2.7	0.3

I separated players between their sophomore, junior and senior seasons. Robinson being a less-experienced junior and 2PP being a percentage that can be improved on, I decided to stay away from freshmen for this analysis. I also stayed away from stretch PFs like Pat Garrity who finished with a low 2PP. Such players stayed in the league because of their shooting ability and I doubt that will become Robinson’s niche. But this is a good time to note that Robinson hit 7 of his 14 3-point attempts.

The three best players in this group, McDyess, Walker and Brown, all posted much better defensive numbers than Robinson. That makes his chances of becoming something more than a journeyman shaky. What Robinson can say is that he’s a better rebounder than any player here and that should be worth something.

It’s worth noting that he was a better inside scorer as a soph and had more impressive defensive numbers as a frosh:

Thomas Robinson	2PP	P40	R40	SB40
Freshman	485	13.5	14.3	4.0
Sophomore	601	19.9	16.8	2.8
Junior	505	21.9	14.6	2.4

He was a part-time player both years, playing 236 minutes as a freshman and 482 as a soph. That makes his numbers less impressive than if they had been posted as a full-timer. It’s hard to call any player a prospect based on numbers posted as a part-timer. They might reflect his real ability, but stats are always more telling if they’re put up as a 30+ minutes per game starter. There is no questioning his rebounding prowess though. This has been a constant throughout his career. Robinson can board with the best of them.

I also have to wonder if his blocks were lower than his ability would suggest because he was playing on a team with a shot blocker in Withey. I can’t say for a fact that he would have gotten more blocks had he played more center, like most college PFs do. Considering Robinson has that 7’3” wingspan, it certainly seems likely. That and the idea that his real inside scoring ability is somewhat better than his .505 mark this past season because of the .601 he posted in 482 minutes as a soph give him a little more intrigue.

Robinson’s numbers say he’s an NBA journeyman. That he comes up short on inside scoring and defense, suggests he’ll become a useful, but limited rebounding specialist off an NBA bench in the mold of Reggie Evans. But there are some extenuating circumstances that suggest he could be something more than that, though still short of an all-star.

Jared Sullinger, Ohio State: Sullinger is kind of similar to Robinson. His 2PP is low, but not terrible. His rebounding is strong, but the defensive numbers aren’t quite there: Here are some previous sophs with a similar stat line:

Player	2PP	P40	R40	SB40	A/TO
Danny Fortson	539	29.2	13.9	2.3	0.5
Troy Murphy	525	25.5	11.5	2.7	0.5
Jason Caffey	527	19.9	11.9	2.2	0.3
Jared Sullinger	531	22.8	12.0	2.9	0.7

The good news for Sullinger is that there are few players who were at this level as sophs that didn’t make it. Byron Houston, a 6’4” PF, was the only one I could find. This gives Sullinger the highest floor of any player here. He’s a safe bet to stick around the league for a while, though it’s unlikely he’ll be a star. That’s assuming the recent injury news isn’t a big deal.

I don’t know what to make of the fact he was red-flagged for an injury by the league. This doesn’t sound good and isn’t something to be dismissed. The NBA likes to sell all the top draft picks as future stars and are loathe to say anything negative about them publicly. For that reason I have to think this red-flagging of Sullinger is serious and something that has to be weighed when drafting him. I feel this, as much as anything else, is what knocks him below Robinson and Nicholson.

If I’m misreading this and the injury isn’t a big deal, Sullinger is worthy of a top 5 pick in the 2012 draft. His bust potential is low and he still has enough upside that his high end ceiling is a 20-10 guy with weak defense. The injury throws a wrench into things and makes him more of a risk.

John Henson, North Carolina: Henson is the energy guy. If he can become a 15-25 minute per game rebounding/defense maniac, us fans will get the pleasure of watching him morph from a nice, clean cut college kid to an over-tattooed pro with crazy/scary hair who insists on and gets a clause in his contract that gives his pet cougar and best friend Steve two courtside seats for every home game. Or something like that. Players in the role that was perfected by Dennis Rodman are always the ones to add such flair to their game. Henson has a chance to become such a player.

Not a good chance though. I’d like him a lot better if his R40 were closer to 15.0 and his SB40 were closer to 5.0. He was closer to that as a soph, hitting 13.9 and 5.2, so he has more ability than this down year suggests. There’s little in the way of offense here. Henson is definitely a late lottery draftee based on his defensive/rebounding potential. He has some work to do, but there’s enough potential here to think he can become that energy guy who gives a team 15-25 minutes of rebounding and defensive hell every game.

JaMychal Green, Alabama: Green has shown enough during his career that he’s worth a draft pick. His profile is good defender, adequate rebounder and weak offensively. Because his strength is defense, I feel he has a decent chance to stick somewhere. He has enough that I could see him knocking around NBA benches for a time and maybe even getting into a rotation if things went right for him.

Mitchell Watt, Buffalo: Another senior-come-lately. Watt had been a part-time player his first three seasons, mainly because of issues with fouls. He got that under control as a senior and checked in with an impressive year.

As a prospect he still comes up a tad short. His strength is defense and that’s a good thing. He also added a decent 3-point shot to his limited offensive arsenal and is one of the better passing big men available. Both skills add to his value. The biggest negative is he was a below-average rebounder in a small college conference. He’s worth a flyer in round 2 because of his potential to become a defensive specialist with a decent outside shot.

Arnett Moultrie, Mississippi State: Moultrie seems over rated to me. He’s being sold as something of an athletic, multi-skilled big guy. He’s been solidly in round one of most of the mocks. The problem I see is he just isn’t that good. The only stat he has that’s a positive is rebounding, at 11.8 R40. That’s a nice number, but hardly makes him the 2^nd coming of Dennis Rodman or even comparable to Thomas Robinson. He has flashed some outside shooting ability, so there’s some potential as a stretch PF.

There are also a couple of non-stat negatives on Moultrie. The first is he’s a transfer from UTEP who sat out a year. Because he started young he’s still the age of most juniors, but transfers don’t have a good history. There’s also the fact that Mississippi State missed the tournament this past year. Players drafted in round one whose teams missed the tournament are more likely to bust.

I can see why Moultrie is intriguing. He has NBA size and length. He shows flashes of a nice inside-outside game. But he hasn’t turned that ability into NBA prospect level production. Upside and potential just doesn’t sell as well after 3000+ minutes of college ball. Moultrie is worth a risk early in round 2, but would be a reach earlier than that.

Ricardo Ratliffe, Missouri: He’s a 5^th-year senior who had his best season, which is a negative. Not that he had his best season, but that it took until the point in his career when most players are done with college. He had a great season scoring inside. Whenever a player hits 69% of his shots while scoring over 20 P40, we have to take notice. The only players I found who topped this number while playing 900+ minutes at a major college were Michael Bradley, Larry Johnson and Steve Scheffler. Scheffler was a poor rebounder/defender who didn’t look like a prospect in any way other than the FG pct. Bradley was a stathead favorite after this, his junior year at Villanova and has some similarities to Ratliffe, but was a better prospect. He had transferred after two unproductive seasons at Kentucky. He stuck around the league for a while, but never made an impact. Larry Johnson had a nice career, but was a much better college player than Ratliff across the board.

The fact that he was such a super-efficient scorer with adequate rebounding intrigues me enough that I’d give him a 2^nd round look. He looks too much like an undersized center though and his defense is weak, as Kyle O’Quinn exploited in the tournament.

Drew Gordon, New Mexico: Other than Robinson, Gordon is the best rebounder of this group. The rest of his game is substandard and he’s a transfer, which is a negative. His rebounding prowess makes him worth a look in round 2.

Cameron Moore, UAB: Another player who has flashed just enough to intrigue. He has no inside game, but rebounds and defends well enough that he’s worth a look. He also has flashed some 3-point shooting ability. As is the case with a lot of the players here, he’s not a bad get in late round 2.

Miles Plumlee, Duke: Miles would have to be considered strictly a rebounding guy. He’s a good rebounder, but I doubt good enough to carry the rest of his game which is pretty weak.

Quincy Acy, Baylor: He’s never been a great scorer, but he has been pretty efficient on the 2-pointers, including 2 seasons over 60%. His rebounding is a little soft and his defense is only adequate. He’s worth a look, because of decent numbers and length.

About Hoops Analyst:

Hoops Analyst is the premier destination for in-depth basketball analysis, insight, and commentary.