There have been a lot of good SFs come into the league since LeBron and Carmelo headed the 2003 draft class. This group has a chance to be as good as any SF class ever. It is a deep, diverse group that features a lot of potential stars. The SFs are what makes the 2014 draft so deep and potentially a historically good one.
In addition to the depth of this group, what should make them a fun group to watch develop is there is no clear cut best prospect in the group. There is no LeBron James or Kevin Durant here. There is no surefire star. There is some level of doubt surrounding every one of these players. Some will excel and others will fade. It will be fun to watch it all play out over the next 10-15 years.
There are two types of SFs available. There are the scorers (McDermott, Warren, Early and Hood) and the multi-skilled group (Gordon, Anderson, Saric and McDaniels). I’m not sure where the top 2 stars, Wiggins and Parker, fit in yet. I prefer the latter group, because with SFs a diverse set of skills has always seemed to work better for prospects than simply being a good college scorer. From looking at the mocks there appears to be a lot of love out there for the scorers, especially those who can gun it from behind the arc. That means some of the multi-skilled SFs will be bargains late in round one. Here are the numbers:
|
SF Prospects |
2PP |
3PP |
P40 |
R40 |
A40 |
SB40 |
A/TO |
| Jabari Parker |
504 |
358 |
25.0 |
11.4 |
1.5 |
3.0 |
0.5 |
| Aaron Gordon |
513 |
356 |
16.0 |
10.3 |
2.6 |
2.5 |
1.4 |
| Kyle Anderson |
480 |
483 |
17.5 |
10.4 |
7.7 |
3.0 |
2.1 |
| Dario Saric |
551 |
345 |
20.0 |
11.7 |
3.9 |
2.3 |
1.0 |
| Andrew Wiggins |
493 |
341 |
20.2 |
6.9 |
1.8 |
2.5 |
0.7 |
| KJ McDaniels |
527 |
304 |
21.3 |
8.8 |
2.0 |
4.9 |
0.7 |
| Doug McDermott |
567 |
449 |
32.9 |
8.6 |
1.9 |
0.5 |
0.9 |
| TJ Warren |
580 |
267 |
29.0 |
8.3 |
1.3 |
2.8 |
0.5 |
| Jerami Grant |
506 |
0 |
15.8 |
8.9 |
1.8 |
1.8 |
1.2 |
| Tymell Murphy |
634 |
283 |
19.4 |
8.6 |
2.6 |
4.0 |
0.8 |
| Cleanthony Early |
579 |
375 |
24.0 |
8.6 |
1.1 |
2.3 |
0.4 |
| Thanasis Antekounmpo |
572 |
309 |
15.7 |
5.6 |
2.8 |
3.2 |
0.9 |
| Glenn Robinson III |
562 |
306 |
17.0 |
5.8 |
1.6 |
1.6 |
1.0 |
| Rodney Hood |
494 |
420 |
19.6 |
4.8 |
2.6 |
1.2 |
1.4 |
1. Jabari Parker, Duke: This is really a hard choice, but when it comes down to it I think Parker has to be at the top. The upside is obvious and there are no red flags in his numbers.
3. Kyle Anderson, UCLA: Anderson is a baffling prospect. His numbers are so atypical they’re hard to wrap my head around. They’re also so impressive that I can’t ignore them. He played the point at UCLA this past year and posted an A40, 7.7, that was higher than any PG prospect in the 2014 draft. His 8.9 defensive rebounds per 40 minutes are more than any serious center or PF prospect other than Vonleh, Embiid and Eric Moreland. He is said to be weak defensively, but he hit the magic 3.0 SB40 mark. He hit .483 on 3-pointers, which combined with his rebounding prowess makes him a guy who could play some stretch 4.
I can’t comp him to any recent player, because there are no players like him in recent years. I could go back to Magic Johnson as the last player I can find who came in with this same combination of passing and rebounding. Magic was at 8.1 R40 and 9.3 A40 in his sophomore season when he led that great Spartan championship run. For what it’s worth Magic scored 18.9 P40 on .468 shooting that year (the 3-pointer hadn’t been adopted yet), both numbers that are comparable to Anderson’s 17.5 and .480. Magic’s steals and blocks numbers are an unknown.
This isn’t to say Anderson is another Magic. That would be silly. It is even a little embarrassing that I’m comparing a player ranked in the 20s in most mocks to a top 5 all-time player. I haven’t even seen where anyone thinks Kyle Anderson can even play the point in the NBA
A more reasonable comp might be Boris Diaw. Like Diaw Anderson looks to pass first and to be a super role player. In Diaw’s last French season before joining the NBA he posted a 7.7 R40, 3.6 SB40 and a 6.0 A40 according to Draftexpress.com. Diaw was a more efficient scorer than Anderson, hitting .608 on 2-pointers, but only scoring 10.4 P40.
Of the many careers that will start with the 2014 draft there are none I’m looking forward to as much a Kyle Anderson’s. It wouldn’t surprise me if he became a transcendent player. It wouldn’t surprise me if the scouts who say he’s too slow are right and his career fizzles out early because of it.
Because I prefer the multi-skilled SFs and I don’t weigh traditional athleticism as a big factor, I feel Anderson will become a pretty darn good NBA player. SFs with a wide range of skills have always performed better as pros than those who are strictly scorers. Anderson has been a dominant passer and rebounder in college. His defense has been solid. The scoring isn’t there yet, but he did hit 48% of his treys. Like Diaw I think he’ll fit great on any team. On a team full of gunners and ballhogs like Sacramento or the LA Lakers, he would be something of a godsend.
4. Dario Saric, Cibona Zabgreb: He’s a tough guy to keep up with. I read some things that have him locked up in Europe for 2-3 seasons, but he’s apparently planning on being in the Green Room for the draft, so he obviously has his eye on the NBA. I have him as a SF rather than a PF, because his strength is passing rather than defense and that suits an SF better. He does rebound well enough that he’s be a solid stretch 4 should he improve his 3-pointer.
Saric is an excellent prospect. His passing skills while playing both forward positions will certainly bring comps to fellow Croat Toni Kukoc and those are realistic. He should hold a lot of appeal for teams with multiple picks drafting in the middle of round one. He’ll be worth the wait.
5. Andrew Wiggins, Kansas: In 5 years I suspect I’ll be in hiding due to embarrassment over this ranking. But the more I rattle this around in my head the less I see Wiggins as being the player he’s hyped as. He just doesn’t have the any dominant numbers and such players rarely become special.
6. KJ McDaniels, Clemson: McDaniels has quietly checked in with a terrific year for a prospect. It’s hard out there for a non-freshman SF prospect in 2014. Most of the buzz has centered on the freshmen or college POY McDermott. McDaniels is a terrific prospect in his own right. He brings the all-around game that I love to see in a prospect. He’s been especially solid on defense, posting 3 consecutive SB40s over 4.5. In 2014 his offense caught up to his defense and he was one of the best 2-way players in the nation.
He’s a little short at 6’6” and light at 196 lb. He does have a 6’11” wingspan, but he’ll probably need to bulk up some. The other concern is that his offense, while decent still needs some work particularly from behind the arc.
The key for McDaniels will be continuing the offensive improvement he started this past year. If he can develop a strong offensive game he has a chance to become one of the better 2-way forwards in the league. Offense is a much easier thing to develop than defense, so he has a decent chance to get there.
7. Doug McDermott, Creighton: I didn’t really appreciate how historically great a scorer Doug McDermott was until I looked closer at his numbers. As a senior he hit 32.9 P40, which is second only to Glenn Robinson’s 35.6 in ’94 among all SFs in my database. He’s the only SF to top 30.0 twice in his career, doing so in consecutive seasons. Here are the 30+ P40 seasons by SFs:
|
SF Prospects |
2PP |
3PP |
P40 |
R40 |
A40 |
SB40 |
A/TO |
| Glen Rice |
604 |
516 |
30.2 |
7.4 |
2.7 |
1.6 |
1.1 |
| Glenn Robinson |
522 |
380 |
35.6 |
11.9 |
2.3 |
3.0 |
0.5 |
| Gerald Glass |
565 |
376 |
31.4 |
9.5 |
2.1 |
4.4 |
0.6 |
| Michael Beasley |
562 |
379 |
31.3 |
14.7 |
1.4 |
3.5 |
0.4 |
| Adam Morrison |
523 |
428 |
30.7 |
6.0 |
1.9 |
1.5 |
0.8 |
| Doug McDermott (Jr) |
573 |
490 |
30.2 |
10.0 |
2.1 |
0.4 |
0.6 |
| Doug McDermott (Sr) |
567 |
449 |
32.9 |
8.6 |
1.9 |
0.5 |
0.9 |
The 2 Glen(n)s reached all-star level for a few years. The other 3 didn’t do much with Beasley and Morrison being a couple of recent notable busts. Beasley was more of a PF in college, but I decided to include him because he had an inside-outside game like McDermott and the others here. Robinson and Rice were the 2 best passers in the group. Glass was the only one who posted dominant defensive numbers.
McDermott was a more efficient scorer in both years than any player except Rice. Rice is obviously the career that any team drafting McDermott would be hoping for. McDermott wasn’t nearly as good as Rice, but is the only player on the list who is even close to Rice in scoring efficiency.
What has troubled me about McDermott after following him for 3 seasons is his anemic defensive numbers. In 4570 minutes of NCAA ball he has a total of 34 steals and 14 blocks. That’s barely one of either per 100 minutes. As great as his scoring prowess has been, his defense has been that bad.
What do the weak defensive numbers mean for his NBA chances though? Rice had a stellar career with a relatively low SB40 (though still 4 times higher than McDermott), but great scoring. Can McDermott do the same? Here are players who had at least a decent NBA career after failing to top 1.0 SB40:
|
SF Prospects |
2PP |
3PP |
P40 |
R40 |
A40 |
SB40 |
A/TO |
| Don MacLean |
510 |
353 |
25.6 |
9.6 |
2.6 |
0.9 |
0.8 |
| Jason Kapono |
502 |
398 |
20.1 |
6.2 |
2.4 |
0.7 |
1.0 |
| Steve Novak |
500 |
467 |
20.7 |
7.0 |
1.5 |
0.9 |
1.2 |
| Doug McDermott |
567 |
449 |
32.9 |
8.6 |
1.9 |
0.5 |
0.9 |
MacLean’s career was looking promising when he scored 18.2 PPG and was awarded most improved player in his second season. He lost a lot of the next season to injury and was never the same. Kapono and Novak both logged a lot of minutes thanks to their shooting prowess.
This is a good news/bad news list for McDermott. The bad news is all three players had nothing more than journeymen careers. The good news is he’s by far the best player of the 4 and could be expected to exceed what the others accomplished.
I’m much higher on Doug McDermott’s NBA prospects after digging a little deeper into his numbers and the history of such players. I doubt very much he’ll become another Glen Rice. I do think his offense will be enough to keep him in the league for a long time. I feel his high end is a 15-20 PPG scorer who is frequently mocked as the worst defender in the league. The worst case scenario is a player like Novak or Kapono whose ability to drill the trey keeps him in the league for a long career.
8. TJ Warren, North Carolina State: After a decent, but middling freshman year, TJ Warren exploded as a soph. During the final 3 months of the season Warren was one of the most dominant players in the nation.
|
TJ Warren |
2PP |
3PP |
P40 |
R40 |
A40 |
SB40 |
A/TO |
| Freshman |
632 |
519 |
18.0 |
6.2 |
1.2 |
2.4 |
0.8 |
| Soph (Nov-Dec) |
612 |
220 |
23.6 |
9.2 |
1.3 |
2.8 |
0.5 |
| Soph (Jan-Mar) |
561 |
303 |
32.5 |
7.7 |
1.4 |
2.8 |
0.5 |
As mentioned in the McDermott comment, scoring 30+ P40 is a big deal. That Warren did this over the course of 3 months against the toughest part of the schedule is very impressive. The thing that concerns me is the low, 4.2 and 2.8, ASB40 and SB40. With SF prospects the lines between the best and the mediocre have been 5.0 ASB40 and 3.0 SB40. Prospects who fall below these numbers rarely achieve more than journeyman level. The exception here is players who can shoot the lights out like Glen Rice and possibly McDermott. Warren hasn’t shown he’s such a player, though I’m sure he’s better than the .267 he hit this year.
The other negative about Warren is his game lacks diversity. His strength is scoring. He’s been a great scorer inside the arc during his 2 seasons. It is questionable whether he can continue that at the next level. It’s hard to see him sliding over to PF, because he isn’t much of a rebounder. His passing skills are poor.
As good as Warren’s season has been there wasn’t a lot here to suggest he’ll make a great pro. His great offensive numbers would look much better if he had something else like a double digit R40 or some good passing and defensive numbers. As it is he looks like a one-dimensional college star who will struggle in the pros unless he can expand his game. He’s still worthy of a late first round pick based on his upside as just a soph and how spectacular his offensive game was this year.
9. Jerami Grant, Syracuse: Grant is a raw player whose ascent into round one of the mocks has been puzzling. He’s long and athletic, but that has yet to translate into good prospect numbers on either side of the court. He’s a young sophomore, having just turned 20 after the season ended, so I can buy into his upside a little. He also flashed some 3-point shooting ability as a freshman, hitting 40% on 6-15 before bricking all 5 attempts this past season. He’s also a low turnover player and that’s also a good thing. But those are the only positive things I can say about his numbers. Right now he isn’t close offensively or defensively.
Drafting Grant in round one would be quite a leap of faith. There are some good signs here, but there’s a lot of development that needs to happen in his game and there aren’t many positive stats that suggest it will happen. This is a player to take a pass on unless he drops deep into round 2.
10. Tymell Murphy, Florida International: Murphy put in a couple of solid seasons at FIU after a couple of years at 2 separate JUCOs. He has some very impressive numbers in his 2 seasons. He was over .600 both years in 2PP. His rebounding, passing and defensive numbers are strong. There is a lot to like here. The negatives are out there too. He’s 23. He hasn’t been much of a shooter, barely over .300 on 84 career attempts. He’s listed at 6’5”.
He invoked Murphy’s law by becoming draft eligible in a year that is thick with SF prospects and he has been lost in the shuffle. I like him though and feel he’s worthy of a 2nd round pick. Most of the negatives are somewhat superficial things that had little to do with what he actually did on the court. In the 2 seasons he played college ball everything about his game was solid.
11. Cleanthony Early, Wichita State: A player who would have been called a ‘tweener back in the day is now much more valuable as a stretch 4. The reasons to like Early are his scorer’s mentality and the fact that he hit .375 on 3-pointers this past year. His 0.4 A/TO should be considered a red flag and his defensive numbers are too low. He’s good enough to be worth a look as a stretch 4, but not too high in the 2014 draft.
12. Thanasis Antekounmpo, Delaware 87ers: He isn’t the best of the Antekounmpo brothers and he might be more of a SG, but he does have a nice, diverse enough game that he’s worth looking at. As a bonus, having the lesser Antekounmpo brother on your roster might give a team an edge when/if the younger and more talented Antekounmpo brother decides to shop his talents around in a few years. And yes, I used this opportunity to practice typing “Antekounmpo”, because there’s a good chance us hoops fans are going to be saying that name a lot in coming years.
13. Glenn Robinson III, Michigan: I don’t see a lot to like with Robinson III. Other than being an excellent finisher, he has flashed few skills that would make me think he can succeed at the next level. His 3-pointer drops barely 30% of the time. The defensive, passing and rebounding numbers are weak. He isn’t a big-time scorer. The only reason to think there’s more here than what the numbers suggest is the possibility that Bielein’s system at Michigan suppresses the stats of perimeter players. The evidence for this is that both Hardaway and Burke had strong rookie seasons last year after posting so-so prospect numbers. This year there are too many good SF prospects out there to even consider taking a chance on a player with numbers this weak.
14. Rodney Hood, Duke: Hood is a player who will have to make it on his shooting ability, because there is little else he does well. He rebounds at a lower rate than many guards. He has weak defensive numbers and his inside scoring isn’t that special. Because he transferred and sat out a season, he’s the age, 21, of a typical junior even though he’s listed as a sophomore. Best case scenario is a Nick Young type of offense-only player who will have moments where he looks sensational, but is of questionable value because his game is so empty.