I don't follow college ball closely, but in glancing at player stats over the years it's pretty shocking how dramatically player stats leap over 4 years. It seems often they make a massive statistical leap the longer they stay in College, but it doesn't always carry over into NBA production.
Over the past 15 years, NBA teams almost always seem to take away brownie points based on the length of a player's tenure. Sure, Hield put up great stats as a 4th year Senior, but the kid averaged 7.8 points, 4.2 rebounds, 1.9 assists, 1.2 steals with 38%/23%/83% shooting as a Freshman.
Compare that to a guy like Ben Simmons who averaged 19.2 points, 11.8 rebounds, 4.8 assists, 2.0 steals, 56%/33%/67% shooting as a Freshman. What kind of stats would he put up if he were forced to stay 4 years? 40+ points per game?
Also, there's studies that show that players basically stop dramatically improving statistically at the age of 23. They can continue to improve, but all their massive "leaps" usually take place before the age of 23. See "Nba Players age like milk":
http://wagesofwins.com/nba-players-age-like-milk/And yeah, before someone points out individual use cases of players (like our very own Crowder) who made leaps after age 23, I just want to clarify the studies are mostly looking at average production of all players. We generally see massive improvement between 18-23. Then a bit of progress from 23-27. Look at the stats of superstars like Durant and LeBron... those guys basically became who they were by the time they were 21. That doesn't mean you can't see a guy like Steph Curry (who was always a deadly shooter held back in his earlier years by playing next to ball hogs like Monta Ellis) suddenly get a significantly larger offensive role later in his career and make a ridiculous "leap".
SO considering Hield will be 23 next year, traditionally teams will see that as a player who is probably done making significant improvements... he made all of them over the past 4 years. Ben Simmons, on the other hand, might be better already at the age of 19... If you project out Ben Simmons over the next 4 years (with significant improvement expected) vs Buddy Hield over the next 4 years (with minimal improvement expected), you can understand why it's pretty freakin unlikely we'll see a 4th year Senior go #1 over a prospect like Simmons who put up arguably better stats as a Freshman than Hield did as a Senior.
DOes that guarantee Simmons will be better than Hield? Of course not. Maybe that Hield kid defies the odds and just keeps getting better until he's 30. But when teams are evaluating who to draft they (usually) don't pull out a minority of use cases ("Well what about Crowder? What about Steph Curry?!"), they look at what is statistically most probable. Most likely, Simmons (if he isn't already better), will leapfrog Hield within the next couple years.
