Interesting Article on Draft Age and How It Correlates with Success

[DefenseWinsChamps]

http://www.celticshub.com/2016/06/06/beating-nba-draft-importance-player-age-pick-range/

Read his article to understand how he makes a formula that correlates age, draft position, and success. Making a correlation into a predictive tool is dangerous work, but it definitely adds the conversation about who to draft.

Does being younger predict success? There is no clear correlation in the top 3. However, there is a correlation between success and youth in 4-20. This makes Chriss, Bender, Murray, Ellenson, Davis, Korkmaz, etc. look a lot more interesting (even though our pick is top 3, he explains why he thinks our pick should be grouped with the 4th for this draft).

Does being older and more experienced predict success?  There is no clear correlation in the top 3. However, there is clear correlation between age and FAILING to meet expectations in 4-20. This does not bode well for Hield, Jackson, Luwawu, Prince, Valentine, and Dunn (also maybe 20ish year olds like Brown, Poelti, Baldwin, Sabonis, Jones, and Skal). There is also significant correlation between being older and outplaying draft position from picks 21 to the end of the draft. Guys like Gbinje, Brogdon, Hammons, Lavert, Selden, Payton might fall into this category.

[LarBrd33]

Makes sense.  These days, all the best players jump ship early.  So if you're sticking around for 4 years, you have the advantage of experience playing against that level of competition while all your peers are in the NBA already. 

Freshmen are use to playing against high school level talent.   Buddy Hield has had 4 years to adapt to the College level.  I don't even follow college ball, but I've looked at enough stat profiles to notice that stats dramatically leap the longer you stay - and it rarely translates to stardom in the NBA. 

[PickNRoll]

http://www.celticshub.com/2016/06/06/beating-nba-draft-importance-player-age-pick-range/

Read his article to understand how he makes a formula that correlates age, draft position, and success. Making a correlation into a predictive tool is dangerous work, but it definitely adds the conversation about who to draft.

Does being younger predict success? There is no clear correlation in the top 3. However, there is a correlation between success and youth in 4-20. This makes Chriss, Bender, Murray, Ellenson, Davis, Korkmaz, etc. look a lot more interesting (even though our pick is top 3, he explains why he thinks our pick should be grouped with the 4th for this draft).

Does being older and more experienced predict success?  There is no clear correlation in the top 3. However, there is clear correlation between age and FAILING to meet expectations in 4-20. This does not bode well for Hield, Jackson, Luwawu, Prince, Valentine, and Dunn (also maybe 20ish year olds like Brown, Poelti, Baldwin, Sabonis, Jones, and Skal). There is also significant correlation between being older and outplaying draft position from picks 21 to the end of the draft. Guys like Gbinje, Brogdon, Hammons, Lavert, Selden, Payton might fall into this category.

Older players who are drafted late tend to do worse.  Younger players who are drafted late seem to improve more than older players.  Ya don't say.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

http://www.celticshub.com/2016/06/06/beating-nba-draft-importance-player-age-pick-range/

Read his article to understand how he makes a formula that correlates age, draft position, and success. Making a correlation into a predictive tool is dangerous work, but it definitely adds the conversation about who to draft.

Does being younger predict success? There is no clear correlation in the top 3. However, there is a correlation between success and youth in 4-20. This makes Chriss, Bender, Murray, Ellenson, Davis, Korkmaz, etc. look a lot more interesting (even though our pick is top 3, he explains why he thinks our pick should be grouped with the 4th for this draft).

Does being older and more experienced predict success?  There is no clear correlation in the top 3. However, there is clear correlation between age and FAILING to meet expectations in 4-20. This does not bode well for Hield, Jackson, Luwawu, Prince, Valentine, and Dunn (also maybe 20ish year olds like Brown, Poelti, Baldwin, Sabonis, Jones, and Skal). There is also significant correlation between being older and outplaying draft position from picks 21 to the end of the draft. Guys like Gbinje, Brogdon, Hammons, Lavert, Selden, Payton might fall into this category.

Older players who are drafted late tend to do worse.  Younger players who are drafted late seem to improve more than older players.  Ya don't say.

If I understand what you just said, I think you are mistaken. It's the opposite. Younger players drafted early outplay or meet draft expectations. Older players drafter early do not play up to draft expectations, but they outplay draft expectations if they are drafted later.

[loco_91]

I think age is an underrated factor on this forum.

[Csfan1984]

The age correlation is well known. I mentioned a few times that Murray at three follows this model. But I think it is more about getting a better prospect more than age. If a guy is 18 and has all the same measurable and stats as a 21 year old you take the 18 year old because he has more development years. Not difficult. Come late draft guys have more holes and questions about their game. Guys with more years have learned how to play with those holes. While younger guys probably haven't even noticed the holes.

[PickNRoll]

http://www.celticshub.com/2016/06/06/beating-nba-draft-importance-player-age-pick-range/

Read his article to understand how he makes a formula that correlates age, draft position, and success. Making a correlation into a predictive tool is dangerous work, but it definitely adds the conversation about who to draft.

Does being younger predict success? There is no clear correlation in the top 3. However, there is a correlation between success and youth in 4-20. This makes Chriss, Bender, Murray, Ellenson, Davis, Korkmaz, etc. look a lot more interesting (even though our pick is top 3, he explains why he thinks our pick should be grouped with the 4th for this draft).

Does being older and more experienced predict success?  There is no clear correlation in the top 3. However, there is clear correlation between age and FAILING to meet expectations in 4-20. This does not bode well for Hield, Jackson, Luwawu, Prince, Valentine, and Dunn (also maybe 20ish year olds like Brown, Poelti, Baldwin, Sabonis, Jones, and Skal). There is also significant correlation between being older and outplaying draft position from picks 21 to the end of the draft. Guys like Gbinje, Brogdon, Hammons, Lavert, Selden, Payton might fall into this category.

Older players who are drafted late tend to do worse.  Younger players who are drafted late seem to improve more than older players.  Ya don't say.

If I understand what you just said, I think you are mistaken. It's the opposite. Younger players drafted early outplay or meet draft expectations. Older players drafter early do not play up to draft expectations, but they outplay draft expectations if they are drafted later.

"The picks from outside the very top of the class through the middle of the 1st round do start to show a trend. Players in this range have been significantly more likely to be classified as “risers” if they’re 20 years old or younger, and somewhat more likely to be outright “fallers” if they’re 21 or older."



It's difficult to digest because of the arbitrary classifications, so I could be misunderstanding, but I think I got it right.

The distinction between picks 1-3 and "everyone else" is arbitrary to me.  The definitions for "risers" and "fallers" is arbitrary.  The use of win shares is arbitrary.  Props to the guy for collecting the data, but I'm not in love with the method.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

PickNRoll I think the communication breakdown came when we used the terms early and late differently.

Every stat is arbitrary to a certain degree (think about our friendly conversation about Bender's vertical yesterday), but I still think this adds to the conversation. It should not be the only tool to evaluate players, but it helps.

I don't think I've asked, but if you had to pick someone in this draft, who would you take?

[DefenseWinsChamps]

The age correlation is well known. I mentioned a few times that Murray at three follows this model. But I think it is more about getting a better prospect more than age. If a guy is 18 and has all the same measurable and stats as a 21 year old you take the 18 year old because he has more development years. Not difficult. Come late draft guys have more holes and questions about their game. Guys with more years have learned how to play with those holes. While younger guys probably haven't even noticed the holes.

I agree for the most part. Anyone in this draft who this would apply to?

[PickNRoll]

You really don't even need data to make these types of inferences.  It follows from truisms like:

1. players selected early are better than players selected later
2. younger players have a smaller body of work and less is known about them
3. older players have a larger body of work and more is known about them
4. as more is known, variance between expected and actual production will decrease
5. younger players have more room to improve
6. truly exceptional players tend to leave school early
7. older players who remained in college 4 yrs are less likely to be truly exceptional
8. young players who are not selected top 3 are more of a gamble
9. young players who are selected top 3 tend to be exceptional

And so on.  The conclusions in the article can either be derived logically or they're probably wrong.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

You really don't even need data to make these types of inferences.  It follows from truisms like:

1. players selected early are better than players selected later
2. younger players have a smaller body of work and less is known about them
3. older players have a larger body of work and more is known about them
4. as more is known, variance between expected and actual production will decrease
5. younger players have more room to improve
6. truly exceptional players tend to leave school early
7. older players who remained in college 4 yrs are less likely to be truly exceptional
8. young players who are not selected top 3 are more of a gamble
9. young players who are selected top 3 tend to be exceptional

And so on.  The conclusions in the article can either be derived logically or they're probably wrong.

Good thoughts. It is nice to see it backed up with data. This allows us to step back and really look at guys without becoming biased positively or negatively about them. Who would you pick in this draft if you couldn't trade?

[MBunge]

You really don't even need data to make these types of inferences.  It follows from truisms like:

1. players selected early are better than players selected later
2. younger players have a smaller body of work and less is known about them
3. older players have a larger body of work and more is known about them
4. as more is known, variance between expected and actual production will decrease
5. younger players have more room to improve
6. truly exceptional players tend to leave school early
7. older players who remained in college 4 yrs are less likely to be truly exceptional
8. young players who are not selected top 3 are more of a gamble
9. young players who are selected top 3 tend to be exceptional

And so on.  The conclusions in the article can either be derived logically or they're probably wrong.

All you have to do is look at the "other" classification.  For picks 4-20 in all age groups, it ranges from 50% to 90%, completely overwhelming all other results.

Mike

[PickNRoll]

PickNRoll I think the communication breakdown came when we used the terms early and late differently.

Every stat is arbitrary to a certain degree (think about our friendly conversation about Bender's vertical yesterday), but I still think this adds to the conversation. It should not be the only tool to evaluate players, but it helps.

I don't think I've asked, but if you had to pick someone in this draft, who would you take?

I'd take Murray, then Poeltl, Dunn, Hield, Brown.  Something like that.  Luwawu, Valentine, D. Jackson, and Sabonis in my second tier.  Ron Baker as my 2nd round flier.

[PickNRoll]

You really don't even need data to make these types of inferences.  It follows from truisms like:

1. players selected early are better than players selected later
2. younger players have a smaller body of work and less is known about them
3. older players have a larger body of work and more is known about them
4. as more is known, variance between expected and actual production will decrease
5. younger players have more room to improve
6. truly exceptional players tend to leave school early
7. older players who remained in college 4 yrs are less likely to be truly exceptional
8. young players who are not selected top 3 are more of a gamble
9. young players who are selected top 3 tend to be exceptional

And so on.  The conclusions in the article can either be derived logically or they're probably wrong.

All you have to do is look at the "other" classification.  For picks 4-20 in all age groups, it ranges from 50% to 90%, completely overwhelming all other results.

Mike

That's right.  He's created a formula that's looking for such extreme deviation -- guys who jumped or fell ~30 spots.  All of the interesting data is in the middle of the bell curve, being ignored.

[Evantime34]

The age correlation is well known. I mentioned a few times that Murray at three follows this model. But I think it is more about getting a better prospect more than age. If a guy is 18 and has all the same measurable and stats as a 21 year old you take the 18 year old because he has more development years. Not difficult. Come late draft guys have more holes and questions about their game. Guys with more years have learned how to play with those holes. While younger guys probably haven't even noticed the holes.

I agree for the most part. Anyone in this draft who this would apply to?

Hield and Dunn are the best examples imo. Hield is better than Murray now, but Murray is a million times better than where Hield was at the same age.

These studies further my hesitancy for drafting Hield or Dunn at 3.