« Retroactive Adjustments to the 2004-2008 Drafts | Main | Draft Success of Every 2011 Lottery Team »
Monday
Jun202011

2011 NBA Draft: Undervalued Studs and Overvalued Duds

Kenneth Faried has historically great stats, efficiency stats, big games against big schools, and even an upset victory in the Tournament on his resume. Maybe we should start thinking he's better than the #20 pick in a weak draft. Come Thursday evening, most NBA teams get an opportunity to be winners and at least pretend they've added an important piece to their developing roster puzzle. The NBA draft gives teams a chance to find greatness in the late picks (Tony Parker, the 28th pick in 2001) and a chance to not screw up a tough decision (Dwight Howard, 1st pick in 2004 over Emeka Okafor).

Even though this is a pretty shallow draft as far as players that can become reliable NBA starters, there are some undervalued studs and overvalued duds floating around the draft boards on the Internet. Here are the players I'm expecting some discussions about in five years, for better or for worse.

 

Players Who Will Be Better Than Expected

 

Kenneth Faried, PF, Morehead St.

Likely Draft Position: 18 to 24
Why He’ll Be Better: Faried is going to be one of those guys who everyone in three years will be saying they knew he’d be better than his draft position. Everyone is also predicting college basketball’s greatest rebounder in the last 30 years to fall to around 20 in a very weak draft because he’s only 6-feet-8 and played at a small school, but they’ll all turn around and be surprised he wasn’t drafted in the top 10 once he’s successful, just like with DeJuan Blair. (Here’s the only place I know of that has him listed as a top-10 pro from this draft.) For starters, his rebounding isn’t good or great, it’s unbelievable. Remember how much energy Dennis Rodman and Ben Wallace put into rebounding? Well that’s what Faried does, except he’s bigger than Rodman. But he plays at a small school…yeah, so did Rodman and Wallace. But he’s raw on offense…you mean like Rodman and Wallace?

For a guy singularly committed to rebounding and defense (2.3 blocks, 1.9 steals), people sure are weird about Faried’s prospects as a pro in a draft that is almost nothing but role players. I understand the concerns about his having played at Morehead State against weak competition, but he scored 15 points, grabbed 12 boards, blocked 2 shots, and got 5 steals in November against #1 Ohio State and Jared Sullinger, the #1 big man. OSU had all the talent in the world and were only concerned about stopping Faried, and they couldn’t do it. Same with #4 seed Louisville in the Tournament, who Morehead State defeated behind Faried’s 17 rebounds and 2 blocks. The most talented club with the best center in the NCAA and a great Big East team couldn’t stop the only good player on a bad team. Yeah, I’ll go with Faried being a little bit undervalued right now.

 

Charles Jenkins, PG/SG, Hofstra

Likely Draft Position: 25 to 45
Why He’ll Be Better: Similarly to Faried, Jenkins was the only decent player on a small school team, yet he still put up great numbers with great efficiencies (the efficiency part of that equation is very important when predicting NBA success). With every type of defense imaginable thrown at him, Jenkins shot 56% inside the arc, 42% behind it, and 82% from the freethrow line on the way to averaging 23 ppg. With an emphasis on better learning the PG position as a senior, Jenkins’ assists jumped to 4.8 per while his turnovers plummeted to 2.2. Not only is that nearly the top assist-turnover rate of every player who might be drafted in the first round, but he did it with virtually no help from his teammates – only one of them averaged 8 ppg or more, and that guy shot 41% from the field.

The common question with a player like this at a small school has to be if they can sustain those numbers against good talent. Glad you asked. 24 points (on 18 shots), 4 assists, and 3 steals against North Carolina. 23 points (on 20 shots) and 4 steals against Kansas. 25 points (on 22 shots) plus 8 assists, 3 steals, and 3 blocks against UConn. Multiple big games against VCU, who were just in the Final Four. These contests are all from the last 2 seasons when those opponents with far more overall talent threw it all directly at Jenkins, but he still came up big. Imagine how he’d do with equal talent next to him. He has all the tools to be a successful pro point guard very much in the mold of Stephen Curry (another small school SG-turned-PG) – how many GM’s are going to kick themselves when he pans out and they’re left with undersized shooters pretending to be point guards?

 

Darius Morris, PG, Michigan

Likely Draft Position: 20 to 35
Why He’ll Be Better: Morris is a pure PG who knows how to set up a team’s offense by attacking and finding the open man, or by using his athleticism and aggression to get into the lane and score over his defender. At 6-feet-5, he’ll post up smaller guards and can be a handful to defend considering how good his handles are. Morris’ intelligence and hoops IQ resulted in an Assist-Turnover rate very close to Jenkins’ (6.7 to 2.9) even though almost all of his teammates had very low shooting percentages because they attempt so many 3’s (only one teammate who played at least 7 minutes per game shot over 43%). Morris does not have a good jumper (25% from distance), but he limits those attempts and was able to shoot 53% inside the arc. Smart, savy PG who limits his outside shots but can get it done going to the rim or posting up opposing PG’s – sounds like Andre Miller to me, except Morris is bigger and more athletic. On the other side of the ball, Morris is a good defender with the size to guard either guard position. He’s a future starting PG, plain and simple.

 

David Lighty, SG, Ohio St.

Likely Draft Position: 45-60
Why He’ll Be Better: Again, we’re talking about a weak draft full of role players, not franchise cornerstone starters. GM’s need to be thinking about most of these players in terms of how they can fit around or facilitate the talent that’s already there. Because GM’s tend to get fired regularly for not realizing basic concepts like this and instead trying to force role players into major positions on teams, guys like Lighty who can make everything run smoother but don’t look like they’ll ever be a star get lost in the shuffle. Lighty is the ultimate role playing SG: great defender who has the size (6-feet-6, 215 pounds) to match-up against multiple positions, great spot-up shooter (43% from 3), and always makes the right play because he’s aware and doesn’t force the action.

He’s athletic, hustles like crazy, and stays active and focused on both ends of the floor. No one’s ever going to expect Lighty to be a 15-20 ppg scorer, but it won’t be a shock to see him drop an important 15-20 from time to time since he’s smart and smooth enough to take it when the defense presents the opportunity. Much like Rockets rookie Patrick Patterson who came into the league without much fanfare next to his flashier teammates and is now beloved in Houston for his hustle, intelligence, and versatility, Lighty will be the guy who can do anything that’s needed, making some coach’s job easier and fans happy.

 

 

Players Who Will Be Worse Than Expected

 

Brandon Knight, PG, Kentucky
Kemba Walker, PG, UConn
Jimmer Fredette, PG, BYU

Likely Draft Position: 3 to 7
Why They’ll Be Worse: When looking at all three of these players, they’re SG’s simply forced to be listed as PG’s because of their short heights. Although Knight most resembles a PG in how he plays, he still attempted the most shots for Kentucky even though every Wildcat who averaged 1 ppg or more had a higher FG% than his paltry 42%. His overall shooting, 3-point shooting, and turnover totals were all terrible down the stretch, so don’t get all high and mighty about him hitting a couple buzzer beaters in the Tournament.

Walker is a 6-feet-1 shoot-first-shoot-second SG who takes a million shots, many of them bad ones, that ended up with unimpressive numbers like 43% FG, 33% 3FG, and 10 or more made baskets in only 2 of his last 11 games, including 5-for-19 shooting with 0 assists in the championship game. UConn did considerably better on the season when he took less than 20 shots (26-3) than when he shot 20 or more (6-6). Good luck turning your club over to a player with habits as bad as his. Oh yeah, he doesn’t exactly play defense.

If you were born yesterday and aren’t familiar with this Fredette character, he lead the nation in scoring at 28 ppg and hit some crazy long 3’s. He also consistently overdribbled longer than he could ever get away with in the NBA, took unnecessarily difficult shots that he could never get away with in the NBA (his 40% from 3 ranks much lower nationally than his 3.5 turnovers per game), and he played horrendous man-to-man defense the likes of which can only be hidden in a zone that usually isn’t played in the NBA. If he had displayed the PG-like game in college that Stephen Curry and Steve Nash had, two players Jimmer fans seem to think make good blueprints for Fredette’s future, I’d buy that he could replicate some version of their careers, but he didn’t and I’m not.

 

Jan Vesely, SF/PF, Czech Republic

Likely Draft Position: 6 to 9
Why He’ll Be Worse: Vesely’s calling card is his highlight dunking, so of course people want to compare him to Blake Griffin. Terrible comparison for many reasons, so try to forget you ever heard it. Basically he can dunk in transition and hit some open 3’s, and that’s about his whole offensive repertoire, and he only hit 3’s in the Euroleague in the 30% neighborhood (and free throws around 45-50%), so…yeah. He’s not a rebounder at all and he’s quite weak. He’s aggressive and active on defense, so the Andrei Kirilenko comparisons come out, which sound good. Until you read on DraftExpress (who have probably seen more of his games than any other scouting service) that “it's tough to ignore the fact that opposing coaches in Europe clearly game-plan against him, trying to create situations where they can isolate their best wing player against him with space to operate. In these situations, Vesely tends to struggle.” Cool – a weak big man who can’t shoot, has no low post moves, doesn’t create his own offense in the halfcourt, and whose defense is overvalued to the point Euro coaches try to get their players who are too slow for the NBA up against him when he’s playing defense…but he can dunk!

 

Iman Shumpert, PG/SG, Georgia Tech
Josh Selby, SG/PG, Kansas 

Likely Draft Position: 20 to 40
Why They’ll Be Worse: I’m putting these two players together because they’re both physical freaks who possess high-level NBA athleticism but who also both make terrible decisions and have been extremely inefficient in college. Shumpert is 6-feet-5 and posted some insane numbers at the draft combine (42” vertical, 18 bench presses, 3.18 ¾ court sprint), but he also shot 41% FG and 28% 3FG as a shoot-first PG who had a terrible 3.5 to 2.3 assist-turnover rate. He’s a very good defender, but he’s the type of combo guard you basically have to hide on offense and hope the ball never ends up in his hands because he’ll make the wrong decisions with it (Remember the news last year about Derrick Favors not getting used properly at GT because of the poor guard play? Well that was Shumpert.)

Selby has elite speed and body control and won the dunk contest at last year’s McDonald’s All-American Game. He was also a string of one questionable act or incident after another throughout high school that ultimately culminated in a terribly inefficient campaign at Kansas (37% FG, 2.2 assists to 2.0 turnovers) that resulted in a severely diminished role by season’s end. He’ll be drafted on potential, but he doesn’t appear to have the head to do anything with it. Both Shumpert and Selby have "unfulfilled potential" and "frustrating system killer" written all over them.

 

Complete Behind the Basket Draft Coverage
Sorting Out All the College Players in the Draft
Sorting Out All the International Players in the Draft
Undervalued/Overvalued Draftees
5 Best NBA Drafts Ever
5 Worst NBA Drafts Ever
Draft Success of Every Lottery Team
Great Draft of 2012

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

References (2)

References allow you to track sources for this article, as well as articles that were written in response to this article.
  • Response
    [...]2011 NBA Draft: Undervalued Studs and Overvalued Duds - Behind the Basket - The Antidote for Conventional Wisdom[...]
  • Response
    2011 NBA Draft: Undervalued Studs and Overvalued Duds - Behind the Basket - The Antidote for Conventional Wisdom

Reader Comments (6)

Put me on the David Lighty bandwagon. Like yall said great size + great defense for his position. While he is old by today's draft standards he'll play in the leauge for a long time because of his ability to defend & hit open shots. Plus I think he understands what great role players do and not to many rookies understand that.

June 20, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterTrey S

The Fredette camp seems pretty divided. I think he will turn out to be a solid pro. Overdribbling and taking ridiculously difficult shots can be attributed to a team that lacked virtually any semblance of athleticism and playmaking outside of Fredette to create a shot. He won't be asked to do the same on an NBA team. Scouts have been impressed with his defense so far in workouts. I think the tendency is to look at game film where he seems to be resting on defense. When 80% of the offense goes through you and you play practically the whole game, yeah, I think he took some resting time on defense.

I'm of the mind that he will adapt his game to the PG position with a scorer's mentality mixed in, i.e. Derrick Rose, Deron Williams. I think comparing what he did in college based on circumstances vs. what he's capable of and will be forced to adapt to in the NBA is like apples and oranges.

June 20, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterBasketball Mind

@BM
Thanks for the comment. My response would then be to ask you to name an NBA PG who did not have a PG mentality in college at any point. It's very rare for players to re-invent themselves in the league with skills and tendencies they never had in college. Also, anytime a player is relying on circus shots in one level to score a lot, there's a good chance the defense at the next level wipes a lot of that out. Yeah, we'll see, but even guys like Curry were actually playing PG for a year in college. And as far as bad teams that rely on one guy to do it all at PG, you got a player like Charles Jenkins at Hofstra who has better overall numbers with worse talent around him who actually was running the team's offense, not just his offense. Again, I guess we'll see.

June 20, 2011 | Registered CommenterZachariah Blott

@ZB

I think this is another thing that's being blown out of proportion...if you look at early in the '10-11 season when he had other scoring options (before his two big men were out), he actually had many more assists and played more like a pure point guard; towards the later part of the season (after Collinsworth went out with an injury, and after Davies was suspended, along with Emery going into a shooting slump), he had to take on the majority of the scoring load, which of course led to lower assists and less overall flow of the offense. But this is what he had to do for the team to win. Over the early part of his Senior year, as well as his junior year, he consistently had games where he dished out 7 or more assists.

So to put sum it up, yes he can play as a traditional point guard when the surrounding scoring permits.

June 22, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterDragonZ

@DragonZ
Jimmer still averaged almost as many turnovers as assists (4.3 to 3.5), so a few good assist games early in the year don't sway me. For the record, against BCS schools, his A-TO pairs are 4-2 (USF), 3-2 (Ariz), 1-7 (UCLA), and 5-6 (Flor), with a combined 9-8 in two games against SDSU --- all in all, not very impressive. Going back to Hofstra's Charles Jenkins, he had far worse surrounding talent and still ended up with much more PG-like passing stats (4.8 to 2.2, best ratio of everyone who can go in 1st Round) while putting up better shooting numbers. If there's a legit PG in the NBA who had Assist-Turnover rates his last year in college as bad as Jimmer's, I'd love to hear who it was.

June 23, 2011 | Registered CommenterZachariah Blott

I decided to look at the top PG's in the NBA who went to college and their Assist-Turnover pairs during their final year in school::

Chris Paul, 6.6 to 2.8 (2.4 ratio)
Steve Nash, 6.0 to 3.6 (1.7)
Deron Williams, 6.8 to 2.8 (2.4)
Jason Kidd, 9.1 to 4.3 (2.1)
Russell Westbrook, 4.3 to 2.5 (1.7)
Derrick Rose, 4.7 to 2.7 (1.8)
Raymond Felton, 6.9 to 3.6 (1.9)
Andre Miller, 5.6 to 2.8 (2.0)
Jameer Nelson, 5.3 to 2.8 (1.9)
Jrue Holiday, 3.7 to 2.1 (1.7)
Devin Harris, 4.4 to 2.1 (2.1)
Mike Conley, 6.1 to 2.2 (2.8)

Rose and Westbrook had two of the worst, and their current ratios are not very good in the NBA either. Nash's is low because he played next to no talent at Santa Clara. I don't see anyone up there who Jimmer's 4.3-3.5 (1.2) or Brandon Knight's 4.2-3.2 (1.2) align with in the least. Kemba Walker somehow threw up a 4.5-2.3, but anyone who's seen him play knows he can't run an offense at all. All three of those guys will have to significantly change what they did in college to be actual PG's in the NBA. Just checked Stephen Curry's (was only looking at players in top-20 of assists), and his was low his last year at Davidson (5.6 to 3.7, 1.5 ratio), but he was stuck on a club with no talent at that point, yet he was still averaging a lot more assists than the three guys I just mentioned from this year, plus his ratio has been low in the league. Kyrie Irving's 1.7 ratio (4.3 to 2.5) isn't ideal, but he didn't exactly ever get in rhythm in only 11 games as a freshman - still, it was better than those three.

June 23, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterZachariah Blott

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>