NBA Draft 2012: Bradley Beal

by Ed Weiland

I’m starting my 2012 draft analysis with a look at the players who are considered potential 2nd overall picks. Today it’s Florida SG Bradley Beal. Using the 2nd overall pick on a SG has been very rare. We’d have to go back to the 70s when David Thompson (1st overall ’75), Otis Birdsong (2nd overall ’77) and Darrell Griffith (2nd overall ’80) went in the top 2. Since then #3 is as high as any SG has been drafted. While the group drafted at #3 includes the greatest player ever, Michael Jordan in ’84, there have been more reaches and outright busts taken at #3. This group includes Dennis Hopson ’87, Jerry Stackhouse ’95, Ben Gordon ’04, OJ Mayo ’08 and James Harden ’09. What this says is drafting a SG in the top 3 is a risky proposition.

Statistically, Beal measures up OK as a prospect. He has the high RSB40 (combined rebounds, steals and blocks per 40 minutes) and 2PP (2-point field goal percentage), but he didn’t score as frequently as good SG prospects should. The statistic that stands out as a red flag for Beal is his low, 17.4, P40 (points per 40 minutes). Historically it has been important for SG prospects to be at 20.0 and preferably higher. A scorer’s mentality is vital for any NBA SG and it isn’t clear whether or not Beal has this yet. What Beal has going for him is he’s still very young. Freshmen get some leeway on hitting all the benchmarks. In the case of Beal, he joined a college backcourt that already featured a couple of mad bombers in Kenny Boynton and Erving Walker. It is likely Beal found FG attempts difficult to come by as a freshman.

There have been freshmen who overcame low-scoring starts, upped their P40 in subsequent years and became solid NBA SGs. The tables below compare Beal with similar players. Those being SGs who scored less than 18.0 P40 as college freshmen, but also posted a high RSB40. The first group is players who were drafted and went on to have a successful NBA career. The second group is players who were drafted in the first or early 2nd round, but didn’t live up to expectations. In all cases these numbers are from the player’s freshman season.

Successes 2PP 3PP P40 S40 RSB40

D. Christie .600 .255 14.6 2.6 11.2

R. Harper .497* n/a 16.2 2.8 12.9

H. Hawkins .581* n/a 15.7 1.9 9.0

F. Hoiberg .641 .260 15.8 2.5 9.7

Ed. Jones .517 .351 17.4 3.0 10.2

A. McKie .521 .321 15.4 2.5 9.3

J. Richardson .546 .296 13.0 1.4 12.3

L. Sprewell .541 .339 17.4 1.6 10.6

B. Beal .541 .339 17.4 1.6 10.6

Just a quick note, Hoiberg might be a reach as a “success”. I included him, because he was a 2nd round draft pick who played close to 10,000 minutes in his career and was very productive when he played.

Busts 2PP 3PP P40 S40 RSB40

S. Burrell .415 .313 12.7 2.9 12.9

D. Boyce .462 .278 17.8 2.9 9.7

J. Grayer .529* n/a 14.4 1.2 9.3

D. Hopson .474* n/a 11.5 1.6 9.1

S. Jacobson .517 .321 16.2 1.4 11.7

R. Minor .526 .233 14.0 1.9 9.5

B. Rush .474 .472 17.0 1.1 9.4

J. Sasser .448 .262 18.0 1.8 12.3

J. Trepagnier .452 .200 15.3 2.4 12.2

B. Beal .541 .339 17.4 1.6 10.6

The 2PP numbers for Harper, Hawkins, Grayer and Hopson are simple FG pct. The breakdown of 2- and 3-point percentages weren’t available. What stands out here are two things. The successful group of players had a higher 2-point percentage and more steals as a group. The 2PP being well over .500 seems almost essential for successful prospects. Beal is there at .541. His steals are low, at 1.6, but not low enough that I would even call it a red flag.

The two players Beal most resembles in this group are Sprewell and Richardson. A similar career to either of these players would represent Beal’s best case scenario. Both players were considered among the 5-10 SGs in the league during their prime. Both were at best the #3 player on a contender. That’s not a bad thing and I feel this is probably the best guess at where Beal will be in 10 years.

Whether or not this is a player worthy of the #2 pick is another matter. The second overall pick comes with a high price tag. He’ll probably cost something in the neighborhood of $17 mil for the first 4 seasons. Considering there will be at least a couple of developmental years involved with Beal that seems like a high price to pay just to develop the next Latrell Sprewell.

May 16, 2012 | In NBA Draft | 7 Comments

7 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Thanks for your insightful analysis, although I strongly disagree with calling James Harden a “reach” or a “bust”. Given his production so far, he should have been the *second* pick of the ‘09 draft.

Comment by Jacob — May 16, 2012 #
Jacob – I believe that list was of all SGs drafted 3rd overall, not just busts and reaches, hence the inclusion of Harden, as he certainly isn’t a bust or reach.

Bradley Beal is an interesting prospect because his apparent strengths (shooting and scoring) aren’t reflected in his P40 or 3FG% and his apparent weakness (athleticism) isn’t reflected in his RSB40.

Comment by Dan — May 16, 2012 #
In that first table Beal and Sprewell seem almost impossibly similar

.541 .339 17.4 1.6 10.6
.541 .339 17.4 1.6 10.6

Comment by NickS — May 16, 2012 #
One theory, by the way, on the risks of using a high draft pick on a SG — There are multiple ways a team can acquire players: draft, trade, and Free Agency and each of them have their advantages and disadvantages. The biggest disadvantage of draft picks, as you note, is that they require committing resources and a roster spot to a player based on a very limited amount of scouting — a team is going to know much more about players they bring in through trade or FA than they will about draft picks. The advantage of draft picks are (a) they’re locked into a scale contract and (b) they’re a way to acquire top tier talent that may not be available through trade or FA.

As has often been noted there are a lot more people physically capable of playing SG in the NBA than are capable of player C. I speculate that changes the risk/reward balance of acquiring a player early in their career.

That said, I agree with Jacob, Harden seems like a notable success as a draft pick.

Comment by NickS — May 16, 2012 #
In my opinion, drafting is so risky in general, that certainty represents value, even if its latrell/james harden/JRich level talent. Thats good enough for top 5. If the talent level and production is there, i’d rather have it than not have it (if i needed an SG). There’s so little certainty among the other players – Beal jumped up because he showed he could produce and had talent and was the right size for his position.

Comment by vic — May 16, 2012 #
Which numbers are you using for Sprewell as a college freshman? He stayed a full two years at JuCo (Three Rivers CC in MO) before playing for Wimp at ‘Bama. It just seems weird (to me) that you would be looking at his production at a much lower level of competition and comparing it apples to apples to Beal playing in the SEC. And if you made the mistake of using Sprewell’s junior stats at ‘Bama that’s also problematic.

Comment by Ailuridae — May 21, 2012 #
[...] level than you would like to see. Ed Weiland has been saying for years that scoring at least 20 points per 40 minutes is almost essential for any college shooting guard in order to reach NBA stardom. Both [...]

Pingback by NBA Draft 2013: How Unique a Prospect Is Victor Oladipo? | Scripting4You Blog — March 27, 2013 #