Wages of Win picks Oladipo as best prospect in (not) the worst draft ever

[LooseCannon]

Wages of Win has its 2013 NBA Draft Extravaganza up.  Their best hit was probably predicting Kenneth Faried, Kyrie Irving, and Kawhi Leonard were the top three players in the 2011 draft.  Last year, their top players among those likely to be drafted were Anthony Davis, Jae Crowder, Damian Lillard, Will Barton, and Jared Sullinger.

This year, they are tabbing Victor Oladipo as their only top tier prospects.  The only other players projected to be drafted who their system likes are C.J. McCollum, Kentavious Caldwell-Pope and Nate Wolters.

They don't project foreign players, though.

I was hoping WoW would be able to suggest a possible hidden gem who might slip, but there's pretty much nothing there.  It seems like the best bet is to go after a Euro or to take a freshman or sophomore who has underperformed expectations in college, perhaps due to being a bad fit for his coach/system, and hoping the potential is still there.

[csfansince60s]

Don't understand all the fuss over a poor man's Jeff Green?

I guess everything is relative though, and if this draft is as weak as everyone is saying (and I don't think it is)maybe he is a big deal, relatively speaking.

Don't see it though.

[bfrombleacher]

Don't understand all the fuss over a poor man's Jeff Green?

I guess everything is relative though, and if this draft is as weak as everyone is saying (and I don't think it is)maybe he is a big deal, relatively speaking.

Don't see it though.

Oladipo defends and rebounds well.

JG doesn't rebound well  .

But his scoring is at least passable without speculating anything and his defense was amazing last season.

Most overlooked facet of his game last season, by the way. Even without his scoring, the near 1 block a game and the ability to LOCK DOWN LEBRON is awesome.

[PhoSita]

I think Wages of Wins is useful for finding players who get overlooked by the traditional folks.  Guys like Kenneth Faried and Kawhi Leonard.

Using a model will inevitably overlook players who have mitigating factors that need to be considered when you're looking at their numbers.  The WoW models don't account for players like Andre Drummond or Kyrie Irving.

It may simply be that there are a number of players like that in this year's draft.

[LooseCannon]

The WoW models don't account for players like Andre Drummond or Kyrie Irving.

Their model liked Kyrie Irving.

[Roy H.]

I don't know much about their draft record, but I know that their overall models for NBA players lead to some funky results.  For instance, when trying to put together a "scientific" look at the best players in the NBA after the 2012 season, they found the following guys were in the top-20:

DeAndre Jordan
Ersan Ilyasova
Matt Barnes
Jason Kidd
Brandan Wright

I know they also gave the Warriors an "F" for drafting Harrison Barnes, and the Pistons a D+ for Andre Drummond.

[The Walker Wiggle]

Wages of Wins needed a do-over. Apparently, Arturo had some spreadsheet trouble.

"Actually this looks like a solid draft and projects out the best since 2008."

Victor Oladipo is still the truth. He’s a sure thing, but he now has company. Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Jammaal Franklin, C.J. McCollum, Ben McLemore and DJ Stepehens all are rated as sure fire (recommended by both models) and mean there will be excellent value all the way thru the draft. Everybody on this list projects way to low for their value.

The other prospects recommended by one model only are : Arasalan Kazemi, Otto Porter, Nerlens Noel and Nate Wolters. Porter and Noel should be better than their projection, in my opinion, given that the model can underrate bigs and players on deep teams.

God, please, can you keep Shabazz, Deing and Plumlee off the Celtics? Thanks!

[fairweatherfan]

Those models sure do like shooting guards, huh?

[RyNye]

DeAndre Jordan
Ersan Ilyasova
Matt Barnes
Jason Kidd
Brandan Wright

It is worth noting that wins produced is a metric of efficiency more than anything else. All of these players are very, very efficient because they have high shooting percentages and low turnover rates. Furthermore, there is a major conceptual shift between "normal" thinking and the way they calculate player efficiency: most casual fans don't penalize a player for missing shots so long as they score points. However, the wins produced model actively does this: it essentially counts missed shots as turnovers (you can argue about this if you like, but there is a certain logic to it: after all, missing a shot and not getting an offensive rebound often start fast breaks and have the same end effect on a possession as a turnover).

Thus, due to the parameters of the model, volume shooters get penalized whereas players that play completely within their means and don't take bad shots/make bad passes get higher scores. The metric doesn't speak to the "skill" of a player, per se, but rather it grades the degree to which what that player does on the court contributes to winning basketball games. Like it or not, a player like Deandre Jordan DOES contribute to winning basketball games because he only takes high percentage shots and doesn't turn the ball over, and those make up for his poor free throw shooting. (In fact, statistically, as long as you shoot over around 53-55% from the free throw line you are positively contributing).

This model isn't saying that Matt Barnes is a better basketball player than, say, Carmelo Anthony - rather, it is saying that Matt Barnes is a more efficient player, which contributes to his team winning games. That is a subtle difference, but an important one.

I know they also gave the Warriors an "F" for drafting Harrison Barnes, and the Pistons a D+ for Andre Drummond.

And they've obviously admitted they were wrong on those counts. There is no model of player performance that won't be wrong sometimes. It isn't possible.

Those models sure do like shooting guards, huh?

Actually, the Wins Produced model generally finds shooting guard to be the least important/productive position on the floor. It tends to like point guards and power forwards.

[ManUp]

I agree that Oldaipo is pretty much a sure thing. I think he projects as Tony Allen with a 3 point shot. Caldwell Pope is the guy that I hope we take at 16. He put up some solid scoring numbers despite being doubled almost everytime down the court. He has solid size and athleticism for the NBA, great shooting ability and is a very nice on the ball defender. I think he has some star potential.

[Boris Badenov]

I agree that Oldaipo is pretty much a sure thing. I think he projects as Tony Allen with a 3 point shot. Caldwell Pope is the guy that I hope we take at 16. He put up some solid scoring numbers despite being doubled almost everytime down the court. He has solid size and athleticism for the NBA, great shooting ability and is a very nice on the ball defender. I think he has some star potential.

I like KCP too.

He's been moving up in most mocks though - from the teens (even the late teens in some) to around 10th.

[Celtics4ever]

Everyone gets some right sometimes, they throw it out and they are right they look like genius's.   But no draft thing is right all the time.

[fairweatherfan]

Those models sure do like shooting guards, huh?

Actually, the Wins Produced model generally finds shooting guard to be the least important/productive position on the floor. It tends to like point guards and power forwards.

I should clarify - those models sure do like shooting guards this year, huh?  The top 10 is basically all SGs with a couple combo guards and 2/3 tweeners in there.

[saltlover]

Oladipo's going to be a fine NBA player, and NBA team would be happy to have him.  But he's the type of player you get for the mid-level, or a little bit more.  That's nice to have on a rookie deal, which except for the top couple picks costs less than the mid-level, because he's ready to come in and contribute from day 1.  But he's not the type of player who is the cornerstone of a championship team.  He's the epitome of very high floor, but with a ceiling not much higher.

Someone in the draft is going to be better than him, but it's tough to pick who, so a probabilistic model will choose Oladipo.

[sofutomygaha]

I don't know much about their draft record, but I know that their overall models for NBA players lead to some funky results.  For instance, when trying to put together a "scientific" look at the best players in the NBA after the 2012 season, they found the following guys were in the top-20:

DeAndre Jordan
Ersan Ilyasova
Matt Barnes
Jason Kidd
Brandan Wright

I know they also gave the Warriors an "F" for drafting Harrison Barnes, and the Pistons a D+ for Andre Drummond.

One comment about Wages of Wins- they really like role players. Players given limited roles who fulfill them with efficiency come out very well in their evaluation. That means that a second-string sharpshooter, judiciously deployed, will often come out ahead of a superior player with a tougher and broader job. Change-of-pace players come out very well.

If you know what role you want the guy for, though, WoW will give you an extremely good recommendation. For example, if we want a new starting power forward, WoW favorite Brandon Wright is not our guy. If we want a new guy for Brandon Bass's role, though, Wright is the best there is. If you want a backup point guard to play 10 minutes per game together with a ball-hogging wing, no one does that better than Jason Kidd. If you want a center who will capitalize the most on his physical advantage against lesser players as long as you never leave him out there against the good ones, Deandre Jordan does that. Etc...