I've been watching the McDonald's game for years, which is a worthy investment because you can leave the game thinking something like, I gotta remember to watch that Amare Stoudemire guy next year; he looks great. By the end of their high school years, the players who will eventually be in the NBA are easy to spot and obviously talented. Nearly all have reached the apex of their height, and only need to throw on a few pounds of muscles to look as they will in their prime. Of course, there are always late-bloomers, but there are plenty of immensely explosive senior athletes to track in the game. An 18 year-old kid you see dunking now could be a hall of fame player years later.
The 2012 draft class is strong, and as such is the pattern next year's seems to be weaker. There are, however, two kids draft experts are excited to watch. Shabazz Muhammed (his older brother Shazam was less successful) is a wing who can be considered both the best athlete and the hardest worker on the floor. That's a good combination. Unfortunately, his competition as the best high school basketball prospect, Nerlens Noel, did not play because he was reclassified as a high school player too late to be eligible. Noel is a 6' 10" big man, sometimes called a center and sometimes a power forward, who's been called the best shotblocker in high school since Greg Oden and has drawn defensive comparisons to Bill Russell. While the latter is an exaggeration, experts genuinely think he's one of the best defensive high school players in years and even a better shot-blocker than Anthony Davis. See the video below for yourself. Notice how he collects blocks -- it's not by being taller than a smaller guard and getting an easy swat; he comes from all angles and can stuff everyone at the rim. His best attribute is his Gumby haircut.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/C1ruwvp07yI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Without Noel, it was the Shabazz show with only a small handful of other guys like Coleman and Austin noteworthy. However, it was a surprisingly competitive game at the end, and I swear they executed better in crunch time than a few NBA teams.
EAST TEAM
5 Kyle Anderson G/F 6-8 225 St. Anthony, NJ (North Bergen, NJ) UCLA
-He definitely has an NBA body. Does that sound like a basketball compliment or something else entirely? Anyway, he went through a recent growth spurt, and while that's a great thing for a basketball player it's made his previous position, point guard, questionable for the future, and he's moved to the wings accordingly. However, he could excel as a point forward in the mold of a pre-Kardashian Odom; he's one of the most intriguing players to track the next couple years.
15 DaJuan Coleman F/C 6-10 285 Jamesville-DeWitt, NY (DeWitt, NY) Syracuse
-He's the biggest guy in the draft at nearly 300 pounds. Outside of the aforementioned Noel, he's considered the best prospect at center, and he looks like a good frontcourt player in the mold of Al Jefferson.
3 Kris Dunn G 6-3 180 New London, CT (New London, CT) Providence
-I honestly don't remember seeing him play. The point guard class is very weak, and I think he's only in the game for that reason.
34 Perry Ellis F/C 6-8 220 Wichita Heights, KS (Wichita, KS) Kansas
-I've always wondered how Kansas usually had a strong team considering the state isn't exactly a top destination and they weren't exactly recruiting guys out of the corn fields, but here's a talented low-post player from Wichita. He was largely invisible because the all-star game showcases wing players more effectively, and there were too many great big men. Useless fact: Perry Ellis is also the name of a fashion designer.
2 William Goodwin F 6-8 250 Southwest DeKalb, GA (Decatur, GA) Memphis
-Goodwin nearly beat Shabazz in the dunk contest, and they two could play the wing positions together at Kentucky. He was alright, but next to Shabazz it's hard to be impressed.
40 Gary Harris G 6-4 195 Hamilton Southeast, IN (Fishers, IN) Michigan State
-A fairly disappointing guard who may not be big enough to play shooting guard at the pro level. Maybe he ought to try high heels.
25 Amile Jefferson F 6-9 205 Friends Central, PA (Philadelphia, PA) Undecided
-He had a nice up and under move during the game, and he could find success as a combo forward or maybe a full-time power forward in a system that doesn't mind smallball.
12 Tyler Lewis G 5-11 165 Oak Hill Academy, VA (Statesville, NC) NC State
-Lewis is the tiny white guy, if you watched the game or saw highlights. He's very skilled, but rarely do guys that size do well in the NBA unless they're exceptional athletes. Tyler is not that. Even Ridnour is 6' 2".
32 Tony Parker F/C 6-9 280 Miller Grove, GA (Lithonia, GA) Undecided
-Yes, he shares the name with the Spurs' guard. And no, he does not play like him at all. He's a low post bulldozer who scores in the paint using his strength. He showed some nice moves in the game, which is hard to do in an freewheeling, all-star setting.
22 Alex Poythress F 6-8 225 Northeast, TN (Clarksville, TN) Kentucky
-He fouled out, which is so weird for the all-star game that the announcers wondered if it had ever happened before. He did finish with 19 points though. The most I can comment on his game is that his name is awkward to pronounce.
44 Rodney Purvis G 6-3 192 Upper Room Christian, NC (Raleigh, NC) NC State
-He showed range near the NBA three point line, but his name reminds me too much of nervous Pervis Ellison.
24 T.J. Warren G/F 6-7 205 Brewster Academy, NH (Durham, NC) NC State
-He's a good all-around player with enough size for the wing positions and plenty of skill at a young age. His father played college ball and he could become a top scorer in college right away.
WEST TEAM
10 Brandon Ashley F 6-9 215 Findlay Prep, NV (San Francisco, CA) Arizona
-I can't imagine a player named Ashley in the NBA, but stranger things have happened.
33 Isaiah Austin F/C 7-0 210 Grace Prep, TX (Arlington, TX) Baylor
-His body looks like JaVale McGee; let's hope his basketball IQ is better than what you could call mildly retardation. He was 6' 3" just a couple years ago until a huge growth spurt, and like Anthony Davis who underwent the same type of growth has perimeter skills. If he works hard on his game and his head is on straight he could be a good center for a long time.
22 Anthony Bennett F 6-7 230 Findlay Prep, NV (Brampton, Ontario) Undecided
-An athletic and strong Canadian forward, Bennett in the dunk contest had a sweet rock-the-cradle dunk. He's an excellent rebounder, but what's keeping him from a higher status is that he's a power forward with the size of a small forward. I think with the recent success of undersized power forwards from Carl Landry to Millsap Bennett's athleticism will lend him success at least when he's young and spry.
1 Kevin Ferrell G 5-11 160 Park Tudor, IN (Indianapolis, IN) Indiana
-He's insanely quick, and with his small stature he looks like the next Darren Collison or Ty Lawson. One thing about those guys is that they're also excellent shooters. Ferrell's only decent in that respect and needs to work on his game there. He is, however, known by Yogi Ferrell more often, which along with Shabazz is one of the coolest names of the young prospects.
24 Archie Goodwin G/F 6-5 195 Sylvan Hills, AR (Little Rock, AR) Kentucky
-Missed an open dunk in the game while losing his shoe, but he made up for it a minute later by connecting on two in a span of a few seconds. Like most of the guys here, he definitely is athletic. When you're scouting these really young guys it is important to evaluate whether or not the NBA will leave them over-matched physically. Obviously, they need skills and a solid work ethic, but without the athleticism the climb to the top of basketball is much harder. He finished with 14 points.
11 Grant Jerrett F/C 6-9 220 Lutheran, CA (Chino Hills, CA) Arizona
-Didn't notice him too much, but as a stretch four he could have a valuable role for a good team someday.
15 Shabazz Muhammad G 6-6 215 Bishop Gorman, NV (Las Vegas, NV) Undecided
-Right now he's the consensus number one pick in 2013. He won the dunk contest easily, even though his dunks weren't necessarily the best. In the first round he had a nice reverse two hand dunk off a bounce ... but Smart had the same dunk except it was a 360. Arguably, Archie Goodwin should have won, but Shabazz did dunk from a pass off the side of the backboard, which is very hard to complete. Showed a nice tear-drop shot too.
5 Marcus Paige G 6-1 165 Linn-Marr, IA (Marion, IA) North Carolina
-He's a good passer, definitely, but he'll probably just be one of those guards who has a nice college career but never finds much playing time in the NBA.
21 Devonta Pollard F 6-7 200 Kemper County, MS (Porterville, MS) Undecided
-Didn't play because of an errant elbow to the head. I just hope he's better than Scott Pollard.
55 Cameron Ridley C 6-10 260 George Bush, TX (Houston, TX) Texas
-He's yet another good big man. This draft class is heavy on talented centers and power forwards. Also, some of the best prospects not in this game include the F/C Noel and two seven foot true centers in the Kiwi Steven Adams and Tarczewski. Ridley didn't really stand out, but it's hard to in this game when you're a center with lots of competition.
3 Marcus Smart G/F 6-4 200 Marcus, TX (Flower Mound, TX) Oklahoma State
-In the dunk contest he unleashed a powerful 360 off a bounce. He may be a little too small for a shooting guard, but, hey, height doesn't matter when you can jump like that.
35 Rasheed Sulaimon G 6-4 185 Strake Jesuit (Houston, TX) Duke
-Won the three point contest. There was even a special round against the woman's winner, and he barely beat her. There are always only a couple great shooters in the McDonald's game, and they definitely do not lose their ability over time. He was skilled enough to throw in 18 points in a game along with clutch shots against the best athletes of his age in the country. As long as he can defend competently, expect him to find time on an NBA roster for a while in a couple years.
Overall, not the strongest class, but two players seem like they'll be superstars -- Noel and Shabazz. It's a shame that Noel couldn't play because he could be competing with Anthony Davis for a few defensive player of the year trophies in the future. There are some other players who could good, but no one in their class ... as least yet. Time is the ultimate judge.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Blazers' 2012 Draft
Since the Blazers given up on the season and traded their second best player for a draft pick, the rest of a season is about going through the motions before the lottery draft. Every NBA fan knows about tanking even if the league won't do anything to stop it (see one solution here.)
The lottery draft is surprisngly complicated, but here's one of the most important parts: the first four lottery spots are picked randomly where the worst records get more odds. After that, draft spots are in order of worst record.
The Blazers have their own first round pick, which right now is slotted for 12th. They may drop to 10 or 9, but anything more is not likely given how far we are into the season and how close the Blazers are to .500. The New Jersey pick is top three protected, but Charlotte, Washington, and New Orleans are a lock for the three worst records. However, New Jersey still has decent odds to land in the top three because the first four are picked by the lottery. Right now they have the fourth worst record, barely possessing a worst record than Detroit, Toronto, and Sacramento. Hollinger's playoff odds tool has New Jersey finishing 24-42, tied for fifth with five other teams. The Blazers could get a New Jersey pick anywhere from 4th to 8th, and their own from 9th to 13th. Luckily for Portland, this is a deep draft.
Each potential lottery pick who could be taken fourth to fourteenth is shown below. The order is determined by an average lottery draft rating from two sites, ESPN and DraftExpress. Included are important facts like height and stats, which are mainly given in per 40 minute, pace adjusted form to compare players on the same scale (a fast team inflates a player's stats, and playing small minutes destroys one's per game averages.)
Andre Drummond
5 (6th ESPN, 4th DraftExpress)
Center
Connecticut, Freshman
Birthday: Aug. 10, 1993
6' 11", 7' 5", 275 lbs
Andre has slipped in recent months when before he was projected as the top one or two overall pick because as a college freshmen he has struggled converting his considerable athletic gifts into basketball. However, he's been advertised as a great passer for a big man, and even in college he plays more of a finesse game. You couldn't see this in his stats, unfortuately, because of his low assist to turnover ratio, and he doesn't have a consistent outside shot. His free throw shooting in particular is abhorrent. He's even worst than Ben Wallace at this point, and only DeAndre Jordan and Andris Biedrins in the NBA have shot as poorly. However, even they are excellent finishers inside, scoring off dunks and close attempts, while Drummond has a decent percentage from the field but nothing as spectacular as you'd like from a center high in the lottery.
A common comparison that falls flat is Amare Stoudemire 2.0, as I don't think he'll ever be the finisher that Amare is. Drummond appears to be more like the next DeAndre Jordan; consequently, he's fallen a few spots in the mock drafts. In dunk contests he's showed off with amazing dunks; you can see that leaping ability in his high number of blocks. He has the body and athleticism for an elite NBA center, but none of the skills. He's the typical high risk, high reward player, and the Blazers will have to study his work ethic and character to see if he can transform the potential into production. They should not take him as a "need" for their future center.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
14.5 points, 11.2 rebounds, 0.7 assists, 1.2 steals, 3.8 blocks, 2.4 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
51 TS%, 0 3PT%, 31.3 FT%, 21.8 PER.
Stats found here.
Bradley Beal
5.5 (4th ESPN, 7th DraftExpress):
Shooting Guard
Florida, Freshman
Birthday: June 28, 1993
6' 4", 6' 8" wingspan, 195 lbs
Beal was advertised as a great shooter with deep range, although his three point percentage was low. He's a little short for his position, but has a decent wingspan so I suspect he won't have a big problem defending at the position. He's reminiscent of Eric Gordon -- maybe a little short for his position, but he is an above average defender and a good outside shooter who can generate free throws. All that said, I'm not sure why he's slotted to go so high in the draft because he's not overwhelmingly good in any respect.
While Beal's three point percentage was low, draft experts do not expect that trend to continue, and his two-point percentage is 52. He doesn't have elite athleticism, but it's not bad either. Again, this is a player who's good in many categories like ball-handling but nothing spectacular. It's easy to picture him an NBA rotation player, but not as a star player.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
17.0 points, 7.6 rebounds, 2.4 assists, 1.6 steals, 1.0 blocks, 2.5 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
56 TS%, 31.9 3PT%, 77.5 FT%, 20.7 PER.
Stats found here.
Harrison Barnes
5.5 (5th ESPN, 6th DraftExpress)
Small forward
North Carolina, Sophomore
Birthday: May 30, 1992
6' 8", 6' 11", 210 lbs
Barnes has the ideal small forward body similar to Luol Deng or Rudy Gay. One measurement has him at 6' 8", while another at 6' 9" with shoes (NBA players typically use their height with shoes.) Given his wingspan, he has more than enough size to play the 3 in the NBA, and could be used in small-ball lineups as a power forward. He's rail-thin, though not extremely so, but basketball is a game for long, skinny athletes. He might have trouble with the bench press in the pre-draft camp, but ignore that entirely because it has nothing to do with the sport. Instead focus on his scoring skill and defensive potential -- he can score from anywhere on the court with an adept midrange game and three point range, and is already defending well.
There are few negatives to be found for Barnes. He's not the most athletic player in the draft, but he's still above average. By all accounts, he is very coachable and possesses a strong drive to improve. He's a sophomore, but so are many of his lottery peers as the lockout gave them more incentive to stay another year. He produced well as a freshman, but he also improved in his second year. Compared to the other prospects, he has a low variance (i.e. risk) on what you'd expect of him in the NBA. Unfortunately, the Blazers are rebuilding around Aldridge, a power forward, and Batum, a small forward.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
22.2 points, 6.6 rebounds, 0.7 assists, 1.3 steals, 0.4 blocks, 2.4 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
54 TS%, 37.7 3PT%, 72.4 FT%, 22.6 PER.
Stats found here.
Jared Sullinger
7 (9th ESPN, 5th DraftExpress)
Power forward/center
Ohio State, Sophomore
Birthday: March 4th, 1992
6' 9", 7' 2", 280 lbs
One of the first questions you hear about Sullinger is if he's big enough for a power forward, and especially a center. His height is usually cited, and sometimes people will say 6' 9" is just under the ideal height. Ignore those people -- you don't play basketball with the top of your head; you play with your hands. Sullinger has a large wingspan, making him more than qualified for power forward, and at his weight and strength you're not going to push him out of the paint easily. Long-term, I see him playing center for long stretches because his strength and wingspan are adequate, but also because his quickness is subpar in defending NBA power forwards, which will become a worse problem as he ages.
Let's ignore his size for a second -- what matters is his ability to play basketball, and he's fantastic. He's a great rebounder, and a phenomenal scoring big man with a developed post-game and range that extends to the college three point line. The son of a coach, he has a knack for scoring inside and draws fouls at a high rate. He's not exactly a rim protector, but his steals and blocks are high enough to prove that he's not over-matched. If he keeps the weight off, I could easily see him as an all-star power forward. Lost in the amazing Anthony Davis season is how well Sullinger has been playing. For the Blazers this creates a tough choice. Do you go with need or best available? Sullinger's talent is enough for a top three pick, much less six. His rebounding and strength could work well next to Aldridge, but neither can protect the rim. Drafting by just need is problematic because you're more likely to draft someone who can't even play in the league, and at that point it's much better to draft a prospect like Sullinger, a skilled big man who can score often and with great efficiency.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
23.0 points, 12.2 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 1.6 steals, 1.2 blocks, 2.7 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
61 TS%, 38.7 3PT%, 76.3 FT%, 30.7 PER.
Stats found here.
Perry Jones
8 (8th ESPN, 8th DraftExpress)
Power forward
Baylor, Sophomore
Birthday: Sep. 24, 1991
6' 11", 7' 2.5" wingspan, 235 lbs
In a draft littered by power forwards, Perry Jones is the athletic 6' 11" guy who can run the floor and competent in most areas of basketball though not dominant in anything. He's tall enough coupled with long arms to defend power forwards, and even centers, but his strength and quickness will probably force his role as a power forward. He's fluid even when dribbling, and he can jump with an ease not found in most guys his size.
Despite all those gifts, he has yet to produce at an elite level, not even averaging a block a game. The fear is that he's the next Anthony Randolph, an intriguing prospect who's athletic with a well-rounded skillset but has yet to put it all together. That's a better excuse if you're a freshman trying to adjust to a new game, but Jones is a sophomore and has barely improved. The bottom line for the Blazers is that a 6' 11" forward who's a middling rebounder with shockingly few blocked shots is not the ideal frontcourt partner for Aldridge.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
17.8 points, 9.9 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 1.2 steals, 0.8 blocks, 2.2 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
54 TS%, 29 3PT%, 71.0 FT%, 22.2 PER.
Stats found here.
Tyler Zeller
10.5 (11th ESPN, 10th DraftExpress)
Position: Center
North Carolina, Senior
Birthday: Jan. 17, 1990
7' 0", unknown wingspan, 250 lbs
On the other end of the frontcourt prospect spectrum from athletic, raw power forwards is Tyler Zeller, the rare senior lottery pick who's also a seven-foot center. Tyler, not be confused with his younger brother Cody, is a highly skilled big man, shooting better from the foul line than most of the lottery wingman in the draft with good rebounding and shotblocking. His skills on the line also correlate to his jumper with range out to 18 feet. However, he's a senior, and there's a reason NBA management reflexively discriminate against those players. He's 22 and what he's doing now (obviously) shouldn't be compared to the freshmen and sophomores. Look what he did as a freshman: 7.8 minutes, 47% from the field, and 1.3 fouls (over six per 40 minutes.)
Tyler has improved his game to the point that teams in the 9 to 12 range are seriously considering him. No one's predicting stardom, but at that draft position a quality backup center or even a decent starter is a good find. He's mobile for a guy his size with an ability to catch and shoot in traffic, but his athleticism and jumping are below average for an NBA center. Few seniors become important players in the league, but at a certain point in the draft after the guys with star potential are gone Tyler is probably not a bad choice. That's not enough reason for the Blazers to submarine the season, but drafting around 10 that's what you have to expect.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
21.6 points, 12.2 rebounds, 1.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 3.7 blocks, 2.4 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
62 TS%, 0 3PT%, 80.9 FT%, 30.4 PER
Stats found here.
John Henson
11.5 (14th ESPN, 9th DraftExpress)
Power forward
North Carolina, Junior
Birthday: Dec 28, 1990
6' 10", unknown but well above average wingspan, 210 lbs
Similar to Anthony Davis, John Henson grew half a foot when he was a senior in high school, meaning he had already developed perimeter skills before he had NBA power forward size and hasn't had as much time to learn how to play in his "new" body as others. He's a fantastic shot-blocker (but of course not as good as Davis though also rarely fouling at 1.6 a game) and even put up better stats in that department last year at 4.4 a game per 40 minutes, pace adjusted. He can also rebound well, and if not for his lack of strength he would be an ideal frontcourt partner for Aldridge.
The 2012 draft is different than most because of the lack of freshmen, but many of those sophomores would have likely declared last year if it weren't for the looming threat of the recent lockout. Henson, however, is a junior, and it's usually smart to flag players who spend a while in college because if they were clear NBA caliber players they would have already jumped ship. Henson is yet another raw big man prospect, barely hitting over 50% of his free throws. He's already 21 years old and "raw" shouldn't be used so much in his descriptions. Additionally, he shoots poorly from the field with a TS% (field goal % adjusted for three's and free throws) below average, especially for a power forward who scores inside. On defense he can produce in the NBA, but his offense may never be better than well below average, hurting his overall impact as a player.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
17.3 points, 12.7 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 0.7 steals, 3.7 blocks, 1.6 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
51 TS%, 0 3PT%, 50.8 FT%, 25.4 PER.
Stats found here.
Jeremy Lamb
12 (12th ESPN, 12th DraftExpress)
Shooting guard
Connecticut, Sophomore
Birthday: May 30, 1992
6' 5", 7' 0" wingspan, 185 lbs
Where Lamb stands out is his wingspan since shooting guards rarely have a wingspan of seven-feet. Dwyane Wade's, for instance, is 6' 10.75". Wade is actually a good example for Lamb even if he wasn't a good shooter. No one thought Wade was going to be a star, and many pointed to his below average height. But as I've said in the other profiles height alone is not important. Lamb is big enough his position in the NBA, and his ridiculously long arms will help him contest others and shoot over the defense.
Incidentally, his shooting is underrated. He's at over 80 from the line, and while his three point percentage this season is low as a freshman he was at 37% with over four attempts a game last season. The most impressive stat for a player known for his midrange game is that he's 60% from 2-point range, which very few shooting guards do even in college. He's athletic, he can shoot, he's playing big minutes for a top team, there's great defensive potential, and he has freaky long arms. Why is he only 12th? The Blazers have needs at every non-forward position, and Lamb also appears to be a better prospect than others in this range.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
19.4 points, 5.3 rebounds, 1.9 assists, 1.5 steals, 0.7 blocks, 2.2 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
59 TS%, 32.8 3PT%, 82.6 FT%, 22.0 PER.
Stats found here.
Damian Lillard
13 (13 ESPN, 13 DraftExpress)
Point guard
Weber State, Junior (though really a senior because he got a medical redshirt his third year)
Birthday: July 15, 1990
6' 2", unknown wingspan, 185 lbs
After a number of young successful point guards in the league, there's finally a draft low on talent for the position. Lillard is the only point guard slated to go in the lottery. You'll hear him described as a junior, but really think of him as a senior because that's how old he is. Regardless of his age and knowledge of rotary phones, he scored 24.4 points a game with remarkable efficiency, and had good numbers in his sophomore year too. He's been close to 40% in each of his full seasons, and his free throw shooting started in the low 80's and approached 90 by his last year. He has enough size to release his shot, and enough quickness to get open as well.
One thing Lillard can't do well, however, is pass and run an offense. He's a scoring point guard, and drafting him on the idea that he'll net your team eight assists a game in the traditional role is not wise. The modern league has seen lots of success from scoring point guards and Damien shouldn't fall because of it. The injury that ended his third season also isn't as large a red flag as one would think since it seemed more like a freak play (broken foot) than a sign of things to come. While teams are wary of Damian because of his college, Weber State, and how old he is compared to others, he was second in the nation in both scoring and PER. At 13 that's not a risk; it's a safe bet.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
28.1 points, 5.8 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 1.7 steals, 0.3 blocks, 2.6 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
64 TS%, 42.5 3PT%, 88.3 FT%, 34.6 PER.
Stats found here.
Terrence Jones
13.5 (16th ESPN, 11th DraftExpress)
Small forward/power forward
College, Year
Birthday: Jan. 9, 1992
6' 8", 7' 3" wingspan, 244 lbs
A native to Portland, Oregon, Jones is a combo forward whose super long arms allow him to play power forward when necessary. He's a well-rounded forward -- an able passer, great ball handler, steal, block shots, and rebound. As for the negatives, his outside shot is inconsistent and could use some work, which is the same issue on his free throw shot. He came back for his sophomore season, but so did virtually everyone else, and his freshman season was arguably better. It's not rare for players to have an inferior sophomore season, and it's also not much of a cause for concern. In fact, showing that he produced at an earlier age is even better.
As for Jones' long-term position, he appears to be destined as a tweener, but he could also make it work. He's quick enough for most small forwards, and big enough for most power forwards. A bench role would probably suit him best when his team can pick the match-ups like Thaddeus Young on the 76ers. His wingspan should not be overlooked. It allows him to cover much taller players. On a team with Aldridge and Batum there doesn't seem to be a lot of need for a forward, but late in the lottery a quality bench player who can cover two positions is a good value.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
17.4 points, 9.7 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.8 steals, 2.5 blocks, 2.4 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
55 TS%, 33.3 3PT%, 65.2 FT%, 24.8 PER.
Stats found here.
Cody Zeller
14 (10th ESPN, 18th DraftExpress)
Center
Indiana, Year
Birthday: Oct. 5, 1992
6' 11", 6' 8" wingspan (DraftExpress), 210 lbs
The other and younger Zeller brother, Cody's stock has sank while his brother Tyler's ascended. There are a few logical reasons to this looking at their production, but there's a common theme among basketball families -- the youngest players are usually the best. This is because they get to play against tougher competition when growing up (their older brothers or other relatives). Tyler was better this season, but I doubt Cody at the same age would be worse. The older brother as a freshman played poorly in limited minutes; the younger brother has excelled at scoring on a good team.
Like his brother, Cody's a skilled and mobile big man who can pass decently and shoot from the line well. He's arguably the second most productive freshman, but as a center there are a handful of troublesome notes. One is that his wingspan was measured at 6' 8", and if you see the pattern from other basketball players that is not a good sign. You need long arms to shoot over players and contest shots. He's also only 210 pounds (though some sites list him at 230 now) without great athleticism, and his rebounding and shotblocking stats are below average for a prospect. I don't see how he can be a full-time center in the league unless he's grown or his wingspan is inaccurate. Nonetheless, a freshman frontcourt player who can score like that is rarely a risk. I'm surprised to see his brother ranked above him in some mock drafts.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
21.7 points, 8.9 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 1.8 steals, 1.7 blocks, 2.2 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
67 TS%, 0 3PT%, 75.5 FT%, 31.2 PER.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Cody-Zeller-6241/
Here's the short version -- it's a deep draft with lots of sophomores who were too scared to declare last year before a lockout. Unfortunately, a great number of the prospects are power forward, and the Blazers are locked into a good deal with their own all-star power forward. However, drafting purely by need leads to bad decisions and busts. Jared Sullinger appears (at least to me) to be the best player outside of the top three where the New Jersey pick could be placed. Andre Drummond is the pick for high stakes gamblers. He could be a bust because of his poor college play or he could be an all-star center because of the rarity of possessing both great size and amazing athleticism. No one is sure what he'll do in the pro's.
The Blazers also have their own pick for the late part of the lottery. For that one, Jeremy Lamb looks like the best value, a shooting guard who can definitely shoot with crazy long arms. There's also a scoring point guard, Damian Lillard, and a number of intriguing frontcourt players like Cody Zeller and Henson.
A good draft can change a team forever. Everyone knows the Blazers for whiffing on not one, not two, but three first overall picks for centers (LaRue Martin, Sam Bowie, and Greg Oden.) By contrast, in 2006 on draft day they traded new picks Tyrus Thomas and Randy Foye for Aldridge and Roy, respectively. Roy's abrupt retirement may have been bad fortune for the franchise, but a short prime from him is better than Foye's entire career. It was a weak draft, but they got the most out of it. For the future of Portland, they're hoping to do the same again.
Statistics taken from draftexpress.com on March 18th, 2012. Height, weight, and wingspan from ESPN.
The lottery draft is surprisngly complicated, but here's one of the most important parts: the first four lottery spots are picked randomly where the worst records get more odds. After that, draft spots are in order of worst record.
The Blazers have their own first round pick, which right now is slotted for 12th. They may drop to 10 or 9, but anything more is not likely given how far we are into the season and how close the Blazers are to .500. The New Jersey pick is top three protected, but Charlotte, Washington, and New Orleans are a lock for the three worst records. However, New Jersey still has decent odds to land in the top three because the first four are picked by the lottery. Right now they have the fourth worst record, barely possessing a worst record than Detroit, Toronto, and Sacramento. Hollinger's playoff odds tool has New Jersey finishing 24-42, tied for fifth with five other teams. The Blazers could get a New Jersey pick anywhere from 4th to 8th, and their own from 9th to 13th. Luckily for Portland, this is a deep draft.
Each potential lottery pick who could be taken fourth to fourteenth is shown below. The order is determined by an average lottery draft rating from two sites, ESPN and DraftExpress. Included are important facts like height and stats, which are mainly given in per 40 minute, pace adjusted form to compare players on the same scale (a fast team inflates a player's stats, and playing small minutes destroys one's per game averages.)
Andre Drummond
5 (6th ESPN, 4th DraftExpress)
Center
Connecticut, Freshman
Birthday: Aug. 10, 1993
6' 11", 7' 5", 275 lbs
Andre has slipped in recent months when before he was projected as the top one or two overall pick because as a college freshmen he has struggled converting his considerable athletic gifts into basketball. However, he's been advertised as a great passer for a big man, and even in college he plays more of a finesse game. You couldn't see this in his stats, unfortuately, because of his low assist to turnover ratio, and he doesn't have a consistent outside shot. His free throw shooting in particular is abhorrent. He's even worst than Ben Wallace at this point, and only DeAndre Jordan and Andris Biedrins in the NBA have shot as poorly. However, even they are excellent finishers inside, scoring off dunks and close attempts, while Drummond has a decent percentage from the field but nothing as spectacular as you'd like from a center high in the lottery.
A common comparison that falls flat is Amare Stoudemire 2.0, as I don't think he'll ever be the finisher that Amare is. Drummond appears to be more like the next DeAndre Jordan; consequently, he's fallen a few spots in the mock drafts. In dunk contests he's showed off with amazing dunks; you can see that leaping ability in his high number of blocks. He has the body and athleticism for an elite NBA center, but none of the skills. He's the typical high risk, high reward player, and the Blazers will have to study his work ethic and character to see if he can transform the potential into production. They should not take him as a "need" for their future center.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
14.5 points, 11.2 rebounds, 0.7 assists, 1.2 steals, 3.8 blocks, 2.4 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
51 TS%, 0 3PT%, 31.3 FT%, 21.8 PER.
Stats found here.
Bradley Beal
5.5 (4th ESPN, 7th DraftExpress):
Shooting Guard
Florida, Freshman
Birthday: June 28, 1993
6' 4", 6' 8" wingspan, 195 lbs
Beal was advertised as a great shooter with deep range, although his three point percentage was low. He's a little short for his position, but has a decent wingspan so I suspect he won't have a big problem defending at the position. He's reminiscent of Eric Gordon -- maybe a little short for his position, but he is an above average defender and a good outside shooter who can generate free throws. All that said, I'm not sure why he's slotted to go so high in the draft because he's not overwhelmingly good in any respect.
While Beal's three point percentage was low, draft experts do not expect that trend to continue, and his two-point percentage is 52. He doesn't have elite athleticism, but it's not bad either. Again, this is a player who's good in many categories like ball-handling but nothing spectacular. It's easy to picture him an NBA rotation player, but not as a star player.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
17.0 points, 7.6 rebounds, 2.4 assists, 1.6 steals, 1.0 blocks, 2.5 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
56 TS%, 31.9 3PT%, 77.5 FT%, 20.7 PER.
Stats found here.
Harrison Barnes
5.5 (5th ESPN, 6th DraftExpress)
Small forward
North Carolina, Sophomore
Birthday: May 30, 1992
6' 8", 6' 11", 210 lbs
Barnes has the ideal small forward body similar to Luol Deng or Rudy Gay. One measurement has him at 6' 8", while another at 6' 9" with shoes (NBA players typically use their height with shoes.) Given his wingspan, he has more than enough size to play the 3 in the NBA, and could be used in small-ball lineups as a power forward. He's rail-thin, though not extremely so, but basketball is a game for long, skinny athletes. He might have trouble with the bench press in the pre-draft camp, but ignore that entirely because it has nothing to do with the sport. Instead focus on his scoring skill and defensive potential -- he can score from anywhere on the court with an adept midrange game and three point range, and is already defending well.
There are few negatives to be found for Barnes. He's not the most athletic player in the draft, but he's still above average. By all accounts, he is very coachable and possesses a strong drive to improve. He's a sophomore, but so are many of his lottery peers as the lockout gave them more incentive to stay another year. He produced well as a freshman, but he also improved in his second year. Compared to the other prospects, he has a low variance (i.e. risk) on what you'd expect of him in the NBA. Unfortunately, the Blazers are rebuilding around Aldridge, a power forward, and Batum, a small forward.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
22.2 points, 6.6 rebounds, 0.7 assists, 1.3 steals, 0.4 blocks, 2.4 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
54 TS%, 37.7 3PT%, 72.4 FT%, 22.6 PER.
Stats found here.
Jared Sullinger
7 (9th ESPN, 5th DraftExpress)
Power forward/center
Ohio State, Sophomore
Birthday: March 4th, 1992
6' 9", 7' 2", 280 lbs
One of the first questions you hear about Sullinger is if he's big enough for a power forward, and especially a center. His height is usually cited, and sometimes people will say 6' 9" is just under the ideal height. Ignore those people -- you don't play basketball with the top of your head; you play with your hands. Sullinger has a large wingspan, making him more than qualified for power forward, and at his weight and strength you're not going to push him out of the paint easily. Long-term, I see him playing center for long stretches because his strength and wingspan are adequate, but also because his quickness is subpar in defending NBA power forwards, which will become a worse problem as he ages.
Let's ignore his size for a second -- what matters is his ability to play basketball, and he's fantastic. He's a great rebounder, and a phenomenal scoring big man with a developed post-game and range that extends to the college three point line. The son of a coach, he has a knack for scoring inside and draws fouls at a high rate. He's not exactly a rim protector, but his steals and blocks are high enough to prove that he's not over-matched. If he keeps the weight off, I could easily see him as an all-star power forward. Lost in the amazing Anthony Davis season is how well Sullinger has been playing. For the Blazers this creates a tough choice. Do you go with need or best available? Sullinger's talent is enough for a top three pick, much less six. His rebounding and strength could work well next to Aldridge, but neither can protect the rim. Drafting by just need is problematic because you're more likely to draft someone who can't even play in the league, and at that point it's much better to draft a prospect like Sullinger, a skilled big man who can score often and with great efficiency.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
23.0 points, 12.2 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 1.6 steals, 1.2 blocks, 2.7 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
61 TS%, 38.7 3PT%, 76.3 FT%, 30.7 PER.
Stats found here.
Perry Jones
8 (8th ESPN, 8th DraftExpress)
Power forward
Baylor, Sophomore
Birthday: Sep. 24, 1991
6' 11", 7' 2.5" wingspan, 235 lbs
In a draft littered by power forwards, Perry Jones is the athletic 6' 11" guy who can run the floor and competent in most areas of basketball though not dominant in anything. He's tall enough coupled with long arms to defend power forwards, and even centers, but his strength and quickness will probably force his role as a power forward. He's fluid even when dribbling, and he can jump with an ease not found in most guys his size.
Despite all those gifts, he has yet to produce at an elite level, not even averaging a block a game. The fear is that he's the next Anthony Randolph, an intriguing prospect who's athletic with a well-rounded skillset but has yet to put it all together. That's a better excuse if you're a freshman trying to adjust to a new game, but Jones is a sophomore and has barely improved. The bottom line for the Blazers is that a 6' 11" forward who's a middling rebounder with shockingly few blocked shots is not the ideal frontcourt partner for Aldridge.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
17.8 points, 9.9 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 1.2 steals, 0.8 blocks, 2.2 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
54 TS%, 29 3PT%, 71.0 FT%, 22.2 PER.
Stats found here.
Tyler Zeller
10.5 (11th ESPN, 10th DraftExpress)
Position: Center
North Carolina, Senior
Birthday: Jan. 17, 1990
7' 0", unknown wingspan, 250 lbs
On the other end of the frontcourt prospect spectrum from athletic, raw power forwards is Tyler Zeller, the rare senior lottery pick who's also a seven-foot center. Tyler, not be confused with his younger brother Cody, is a highly skilled big man, shooting better from the foul line than most of the lottery wingman in the draft with good rebounding and shotblocking. His skills on the line also correlate to his jumper with range out to 18 feet. However, he's a senior, and there's a reason NBA management reflexively discriminate against those players. He's 22 and what he's doing now (obviously) shouldn't be compared to the freshmen and sophomores. Look what he did as a freshman: 7.8 minutes, 47% from the field, and 1.3 fouls (over six per 40 minutes.)
Tyler has improved his game to the point that teams in the 9 to 12 range are seriously considering him. No one's predicting stardom, but at that draft position a quality backup center or even a decent starter is a good find. He's mobile for a guy his size with an ability to catch and shoot in traffic, but his athleticism and jumping are below average for an NBA center. Few seniors become important players in the league, but at a certain point in the draft after the guys with star potential are gone Tyler is probably not a bad choice. That's not enough reason for the Blazers to submarine the season, but drafting around 10 that's what you have to expect.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
21.6 points, 12.2 rebounds, 1.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 3.7 blocks, 2.4 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
62 TS%, 0 3PT%, 80.9 FT%, 30.4 PER
Stats found here.
John Henson
11.5 (14th ESPN, 9th DraftExpress)
Power forward
North Carolina, Junior
Birthday: Dec 28, 1990
6' 10", unknown but well above average wingspan, 210 lbs
Similar to Anthony Davis, John Henson grew half a foot when he was a senior in high school, meaning he had already developed perimeter skills before he had NBA power forward size and hasn't had as much time to learn how to play in his "new" body as others. He's a fantastic shot-blocker (but of course not as good as Davis though also rarely fouling at 1.6 a game) and even put up better stats in that department last year at 4.4 a game per 40 minutes, pace adjusted. He can also rebound well, and if not for his lack of strength he would be an ideal frontcourt partner for Aldridge.
The 2012 draft is different than most because of the lack of freshmen, but many of those sophomores would have likely declared last year if it weren't for the looming threat of the recent lockout. Henson, however, is a junior, and it's usually smart to flag players who spend a while in college because if they were clear NBA caliber players they would have already jumped ship. Henson is yet another raw big man prospect, barely hitting over 50% of his free throws. He's already 21 years old and "raw" shouldn't be used so much in his descriptions. Additionally, he shoots poorly from the field with a TS% (field goal % adjusted for three's and free throws) below average, especially for a power forward who scores inside. On defense he can produce in the NBA, but his offense may never be better than well below average, hurting his overall impact as a player.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
17.3 points, 12.7 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 0.7 steals, 3.7 blocks, 1.6 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
51 TS%, 0 3PT%, 50.8 FT%, 25.4 PER.
Stats found here.
Jeremy Lamb
12 (12th ESPN, 12th DraftExpress)
Shooting guard
Connecticut, Sophomore
Birthday: May 30, 1992
6' 5", 7' 0" wingspan, 185 lbs
Where Lamb stands out is his wingspan since shooting guards rarely have a wingspan of seven-feet. Dwyane Wade's, for instance, is 6' 10.75". Wade is actually a good example for Lamb even if he wasn't a good shooter. No one thought Wade was going to be a star, and many pointed to his below average height. But as I've said in the other profiles height alone is not important. Lamb is big enough his position in the NBA, and his ridiculously long arms will help him contest others and shoot over the defense.
Incidentally, his shooting is underrated. He's at over 80 from the line, and while his three point percentage this season is low as a freshman he was at 37% with over four attempts a game last season. The most impressive stat for a player known for his midrange game is that he's 60% from 2-point range, which very few shooting guards do even in college. He's athletic, he can shoot, he's playing big minutes for a top team, there's great defensive potential, and he has freaky long arms. Why is he only 12th? The Blazers have needs at every non-forward position, and Lamb also appears to be a better prospect than others in this range.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
19.4 points, 5.3 rebounds, 1.9 assists, 1.5 steals, 0.7 blocks, 2.2 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
59 TS%, 32.8 3PT%, 82.6 FT%, 22.0 PER.
Stats found here.
Damian Lillard
13 (13 ESPN, 13 DraftExpress)
Point guard
Weber State, Junior (though really a senior because he got a medical redshirt his third year)
Birthday: July 15, 1990
6' 2", unknown wingspan, 185 lbs
After a number of young successful point guards in the league, there's finally a draft low on talent for the position. Lillard is the only point guard slated to go in the lottery. You'll hear him described as a junior, but really think of him as a senior because that's how old he is. Regardless of his age and knowledge of rotary phones, he scored 24.4 points a game with remarkable efficiency, and had good numbers in his sophomore year too. He's been close to 40% in each of his full seasons, and his free throw shooting started in the low 80's and approached 90 by his last year. He has enough size to release his shot, and enough quickness to get open as well.
One thing Lillard can't do well, however, is pass and run an offense. He's a scoring point guard, and drafting him on the idea that he'll net your team eight assists a game in the traditional role is not wise. The modern league has seen lots of success from scoring point guards and Damien shouldn't fall because of it. The injury that ended his third season also isn't as large a red flag as one would think since it seemed more like a freak play (broken foot) than a sign of things to come. While teams are wary of Damian because of his college, Weber State, and how old he is compared to others, he was second in the nation in both scoring and PER. At 13 that's not a risk; it's a safe bet.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
28.1 points, 5.8 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 1.7 steals, 0.3 blocks, 2.6 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
64 TS%, 42.5 3PT%, 88.3 FT%, 34.6 PER.
Stats found here.
Terrence Jones
13.5 (16th ESPN, 11th DraftExpress)
Small forward/power forward
College, Year
Birthday: Jan. 9, 1992
6' 8", 7' 3" wingspan, 244 lbs
A native to Portland, Oregon, Jones is a combo forward whose super long arms allow him to play power forward when necessary. He's a well-rounded forward -- an able passer, great ball handler, steal, block shots, and rebound. As for the negatives, his outside shot is inconsistent and could use some work, which is the same issue on his free throw shot. He came back for his sophomore season, but so did virtually everyone else, and his freshman season was arguably better. It's not rare for players to have an inferior sophomore season, and it's also not much of a cause for concern. In fact, showing that he produced at an earlier age is even better.
As for Jones' long-term position, he appears to be destined as a tweener, but he could also make it work. He's quick enough for most small forwards, and big enough for most power forwards. A bench role would probably suit him best when his team can pick the match-ups like Thaddeus Young on the 76ers. His wingspan should not be overlooked. It allows him to cover much taller players. On a team with Aldridge and Batum there doesn't seem to be a lot of need for a forward, but late in the lottery a quality bench player who can cover two positions is a good value.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
17.4 points, 9.7 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.8 steals, 2.5 blocks, 2.4 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
55 TS%, 33.3 3PT%, 65.2 FT%, 24.8 PER.
Stats found here.
Cody Zeller
14 (10th ESPN, 18th DraftExpress)
Center
Indiana, Year
Birthday: Oct. 5, 1992
6' 11", 6' 8" wingspan (DraftExpress), 210 lbs
The other and younger Zeller brother, Cody's stock has sank while his brother Tyler's ascended. There are a few logical reasons to this looking at their production, but there's a common theme among basketball families -- the youngest players are usually the best. This is because they get to play against tougher competition when growing up (their older brothers or other relatives). Tyler was better this season, but I doubt Cody at the same age would be worse. The older brother as a freshman played poorly in limited minutes; the younger brother has excelled at scoring on a good team.
Like his brother, Cody's a skilled and mobile big man who can pass decently and shoot from the line well. He's arguably the second most productive freshman, but as a center there are a handful of troublesome notes. One is that his wingspan was measured at 6' 8", and if you see the pattern from other basketball players that is not a good sign. You need long arms to shoot over players and contest shots. He's also only 210 pounds (though some sites list him at 230 now) without great athleticism, and his rebounding and shotblocking stats are below average for a prospect. I don't see how he can be a full-time center in the league unless he's grown or his wingspan is inaccurate. Nonetheless, a freshman frontcourt player who can score like that is rarely a risk. I'm surprised to see his brother ranked above him in some mock drafts.
Per 40 minutes pace adjusted stats:
21.7 points, 8.9 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 1.8 steals, 1.7 blocks, 2.2 turnovers.
Percentages and efficiency:
67 TS%, 0 3PT%, 75.5 FT%, 31.2 PER.
http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Cody-Zeller-6241/
Here's the short version -- it's a deep draft with lots of sophomores who were too scared to declare last year before a lockout. Unfortunately, a great number of the prospects are power forward, and the Blazers are locked into a good deal with their own all-star power forward. However, drafting purely by need leads to bad decisions and busts. Jared Sullinger appears (at least to me) to be the best player outside of the top three where the New Jersey pick could be placed. Andre Drummond is the pick for high stakes gamblers. He could be a bust because of his poor college play or he could be an all-star center because of the rarity of possessing both great size and amazing athleticism. No one is sure what he'll do in the pro's.
The Blazers also have their own pick for the late part of the lottery. For that one, Jeremy Lamb looks like the best value, a shooting guard who can definitely shoot with crazy long arms. There's also a scoring point guard, Damian Lillard, and a number of intriguing frontcourt players like Cody Zeller and Henson.
A good draft can change a team forever. Everyone knows the Blazers for whiffing on not one, not two, but three first overall picks for centers (LaRue Martin, Sam Bowie, and Greg Oden.) By contrast, in 2006 on draft day they traded new picks Tyrus Thomas and Randy Foye for Aldridge and Roy, respectively. Roy's abrupt retirement may have been bad fortune for the franchise, but a short prime from him is better than Foye's entire career. It was a weak draft, but they got the most out of it. For the future of Portland, they're hoping to do the same again.
Statistics taken from draftexpress.com on March 18th, 2012. Height, weight, and wingspan from ESPN.
Monday, March 12, 2012
NBA Championship Title Leaders Adjusted for Era
Introduction
NBA titles leaders are usually trotted out in discussions of the best players in the history of the league. Bill Russell regularly comes up in this respect because the media love to mention that he won 11 out of 13 titles when he was in the league. He's often called the best player or one of the top three best in the history of basketball for that fact alone. However, there were less than ten teams in the league during most of his playoff run. Even conferences today are much larger. In order to contextualize title leaders from different eras, you need to make some simple adjusments.
Methodology
In order to adjust championship titles, first I found the number of teams every year of the league. This was pretty easy, and there are some surprising numbers. There were only eight teams throughout much of the 60's, but after the NBA and ?BL merged in 1950 there were 17 teams. The league soon dropped some teams, but for most of its history new organizations were steadily added until the mid-90's as the Charlotte Bobcats are the only new one.
Next I put together a list of every player for a championship winner since the first title in 1947 when the league was known as Basketball Association of America (BAA). I included everyone who tallied playing time in the playoffs. Unfortunately, that does not include bench guys who didn't receive any minutes, but I don't think it actually matters in the greater context of this study. Teams can give rings to pretty much whoever they want -- even guys who operate the shot clocks have gotten them -- yet I think when looking at who's collected the most titles I think it's more proper to only include the guys who actually played in the playoffs. There are extenuating circumstances like Caron Butler with the Mavericks last year as he got injured before the title run, but ultimately it doesn't affect much of the top standings.
The first method of adjusting titles is to simply rate a title based on how many teams there are in the league. Winning an eight-team league is much easier; there's no debate there. I adjusted each title win to present standards meaning a win in a ten-team league is worth 10/30 or 0.33 titles. I know some will argue that winning a title before the league was "diluted" is more impressive, but you also have an influx of international players and a much larger US population. Basketball also wasn't very popular until the 80's. Another consideration: expansion teams typically take guys from each team, so the level of parity isn't heavily distorted in the years with new teams as one might think. Then a player's adjusted title for each year is added together.
The second method attempts to reward guys who contribute to winning teams as opposed to role players who ride the coattails of better ones to a title. For production, I used Win Shares as it helps guys who play large minutes and those that lead their teams. It's not perfect, obviously, but it separates Hakeem Olajuwon from, say, Rick Fox well. That year's entire playoff Win Shares were used instead of only the finals because it's a larger sample set and producing for the entire playoff run is more important. Then you take the percentage of that player's Win Shares out of his team's for the playoffs and multiply it with that season's adjusted title (teams/30) for the WS title score. Last step is to add a player's WS title scores for each championship year.
Results
In the table below, you can see how the total adjusted titles compare to the traditional total titles leaders. Instead of hall of fame center Bill Russell it's ... Robert Horry. It's surprising, but in some ways it isn't. In a previous study I found that he's the greatest playoff performer in terms of increasing his PER score from the regular season. He's been compared to the NBA's Forrest Gump, always in the right place at the right time, winning championships with Olajuwon, Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan, providing big shots in big moments. A critic of the adjusted titles method would say Horry at the top is enough evidence to sink the list, but he has the most titles out of any non-60's and 70's era Celtic, and the only player who's won multiple titles on three different teams.
More appropriately, Michael Jordan is second on the list with his teammate Scottie Pippen. I think there are many people who consider winning 11 titles in Russell's era than 6 in Jordan's, but there's enough reason to overturn that reasoning. One is that, obviously, it's easier to win when there are less teams in the league, which is what the adjusted titles does, but it's also an era with more rules to spread talent among teams evenly and one with heavier scouting and advanced defense. The Bulls weren't exactly stacked either; Jordan deservedly receives a lot of credit.
The leaders for the adjusted total titles are mostly Lakers and Bulls players at the top, while for the total titles it's Celtics and a few Lakers. One could argue that adjusting for the number of teams in that season is unfair to winners, but again I'd argue that looking at total titles it's unfair to those in the present.
Italicized: Championships separated from franchise by city
*: Defunct team (those Bullets aren't the same organization as the Washington one)
Conclusion
People saying Bill Russell is the greatest of all-time because of his titles need take his era into context. This is all without judging 60's era basketball based on its unathletic play, the lack of defense -- there were only eight teams for many of the years he won a championship, and there's no arguing that doesn't make it easier to win a title. They were definitely a great team and historically important, but be wary of making grand assessments about players and teams from that time. Russell's eleven titles when properly valued are less impressive than Jordan's six with the Bulls, Duncan's four with the Spurs, Kobe's five with the Lakers, and Shaq's four. Arguing otherwise is based on the false assumption that all championships are created equal.
Update: Bonus! Picture form. Click to enlarge and share with your friends at school. They're be so envious.
NBA titles leaders are usually trotted out in discussions of the best players in the history of the league. Bill Russell regularly comes up in this respect because the media love to mention that he won 11 out of 13 titles when he was in the league. He's often called the best player or one of the top three best in the history of basketball for that fact alone. However, there were less than ten teams in the league during most of his playoff run. Even conferences today are much larger. In order to contextualize title leaders from different eras, you need to make some simple adjusments.
Methodology
In order to adjust championship titles, first I found the number of teams every year of the league. This was pretty easy, and there are some surprising numbers. There were only eight teams throughout much of the 60's, but after the NBA and ?BL merged in 1950 there were 17 teams. The league soon dropped some teams, but for most of its history new organizations were steadily added until the mid-90's as the Charlotte Bobcats are the only new one.
Next I put together a list of every player for a championship winner since the first title in 1947 when the league was known as Basketball Association of America (BAA). I included everyone who tallied playing time in the playoffs. Unfortunately, that does not include bench guys who didn't receive any minutes, but I don't think it actually matters in the greater context of this study. Teams can give rings to pretty much whoever they want -- even guys who operate the shot clocks have gotten them -- yet I think when looking at who's collected the most titles I think it's more proper to only include the guys who actually played in the playoffs. There are extenuating circumstances like Caron Butler with the Mavericks last year as he got injured before the title run, but ultimately it doesn't affect much of the top standings.
The first method of adjusting titles is to simply rate a title based on how many teams there are in the league. Winning an eight-team league is much easier; there's no debate there. I adjusted each title win to present standards meaning a win in a ten-team league is worth 10/30 or 0.33 titles. I know some will argue that winning a title before the league was "diluted" is more impressive, but you also have an influx of international players and a much larger US population. Basketball also wasn't very popular until the 80's. Another consideration: expansion teams typically take guys from each team, so the level of parity isn't heavily distorted in the years with new teams as one might think. Then a player's adjusted title for each year is added together.
The second method attempts to reward guys who contribute to winning teams as opposed to role players who ride the coattails of better ones to a title. For production, I used Win Shares as it helps guys who play large minutes and those that lead their teams. It's not perfect, obviously, but it separates Hakeem Olajuwon from, say, Rick Fox well. That year's entire playoff Win Shares were used instead of only the finals because it's a larger sample set and producing for the entire playoff run is more important. Then you take the percentage of that player's Win Shares out of his team's for the playoffs and multiply it with that season's adjusted title (teams/30) for the WS title score. Last step is to add a player's WS title scores for each championship year.
Results
In the table below, you can see how the total adjusted titles compare to the traditional total titles leaders. Instead of hall of fame center Bill Russell it's ... Robert Horry. It's surprising, but in some ways it isn't. In a previous study I found that he's the greatest playoff performer in terms of increasing his PER score from the regular season. He's been compared to the NBA's Forrest Gump, always in the right place at the right time, winning championships with Olajuwon, Shaq, Kobe, and Duncan, providing big shots in big moments. A critic of the adjusted titles method would say Horry at the top is enough evidence to sink the list, but he has the most titles out of any non-60's and 70's era Celtic, and the only player who's won multiple titles on three different teams.
More appropriately, Michael Jordan is second on the list with his teammate Scottie Pippen. I think there are many people who consider winning 11 titles in Russell's era than 6 in Jordan's, but there's enough reason to overturn that reasoning. One is that, obviously, it's easier to win when there are less teams in the league, which is what the adjusted titles does, but it's also an era with more rules to spread talent among teams evenly and one with heavier scouting and advanced defense. The Bulls weren't exactly stacked either; Jordan deservedly receives a lot of credit.
The leaders for the adjusted total titles are mostly Lakers and Bulls players at the top, while for the total titles it's Celtics and a few Lakers. One could argue that adjusting for the number of teams in that season is unfair to winners, but again I'd argue that looking at total titles it's unfair to those in the present.
Rank
|
Player
|
Adjusted total titles
|
Last title year
|
Rank
|
Player
|
Total titles
|
Last title year
|
1
|
Robert Horry
|
6.70
|
2007
|
1
|
Bill Russell
|
11
|
1969
|
2
|
Michael Jordan
|
5.60
|
1998
|
2
|
Sam Jones
|
10
|
1969
|
2
|
Scottie Pippen
|
5.60
|
1998
|
3
|
Tom Heinsohn
|
8
|
1965
|
4
|
Derek Fisher
|
4.90
|
2010
|
3
|
K. C. Jones
|
8
|
1966
|
4
|
Kobe Bryant
|
4.90
|
2010
|
3
|
Satch Sanders
|
8
|
1969
|
6
|
Ron Harper
|
4.83
|
2001
|
3
|
John Havlicek
|
8
|
1976
|
6
|
Steve Kerr
|
4.83
|
2003
|
7
|
Jim Loscutoff
|
7
|
1964
|
8
|
Dennis Rodman
|
4.63
|
1998
|
7
|
Frank Ramsey
|
7
|
1964
|
9
|
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
|
4.37
|
1988
|
7
|
Robert Horry
|
7
|
2007
|
10
|
Tim Duncan
|
3.93
|
2007
|
10
|
Bob Cousy
|
6
|
1963
|
11
|
Shaquille O'Neal
|
3.90
|
2006
|
10
|
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
|
6
|
1988
|
12
|
Magic Johnson
|
3.80
|
1988
|
10
|
Michael Jordan
|
6
|
1998
|
12
|
Michael Cooper
|
3.80
|
1988
|
10
|
Scottie Pippen
|
6
|
1998
|
14
|
Horace Grant
|
3.67
|
2001
|
14
|
George Mikan
|
5
|
1954
|
14
|
John Salley
|
3.67
|
2000
|
14
|
Jim Pollard
|
5
|
1954
|
14
|
Will Perdue
|
3.67
|
1999
|
14
|
Slater Martin
|
5
|
1958
|
17
|
Bill Russell
|
3.43
|
1969
|
14
|
Larry Siegfried
|
5
|
1969
|
18
|
Robert Parish
|
3.27
|
1997
|
14
|
Don Nelson
|
5
|
1976
|
19
|
John Havlicek
|
3.23
|
1976
|
14
|
Michael Cooper
|
5
|
1988
|
20
|
Sam Jones
|
3.17
|
1969
|
14
|
Magic Johnson
|
5
|
1988
|
21
|
Kurt Rambis
|
3.07
|
1988
|
14
|
Dennis Rodman
|
5
|
1998
|
22
|
Bruce Bowen
|
2.97
|
2007
|
14
|
Ron Harper
|
5
|
2001
|
22
|
Manu Ginobili
|
2.97
|
2007
|
14
|
Steve Kerr
|
5
|
2003
|
22
|
Tony Parker
|
2.97
|
2007
|
14
|
Kobe Bryant
|
5
|
2010
|
25
|
Brian Shaw
|
2.90
|
2002
|
14
|
Derek Fisher
|
5
|
2010
|
25
|
Devean George
|
2.90
|
2002
|
26
|
Vern Mikkelsen
|
4
|
1954
|
25
|
Jud Buechler
|
2.90
|
1998
|
26
|
Frank Saul
|
4
|
1954
|
25
|
Luc Longley
|
2.90
|
1998
|
26
|
Bill Sharman
|
4
|
1961
|
25
|
Randy Brown
|
2.90
|
1998
|
26
|
Jamaal Wilkes
|
4
|
1985
|
25
|
Rick Fox
|
2.90
|
2002
|
26
|
Robert Parish
|
4
|
1997
|
25
|
Toni Kukoc
|
2.90
|
1998
|
26
|
Kurt Rambis
|
4
|
1988
|
32
|
Sam Cassell
|
2.80
|
2008
|
26
|
John Salley
|
4
|
2000
|
33
|
Mario Elie
|
2.77
|
1999
|
26
|
Horace Grant
|
4
|
2001
|
34
|
B.J. Armstrong
|
2.70
|
1993
|
26
|
Will Perdue
|
4
|
1999
|
34
|
Bill Cartwright
|
2.70
|
1993
|
26
|
Tim Duncan^
|
4
|
2007
|
34
|
James Edwards
|
2.70
|
1996
|
26
|
Shaquille O’Neal
|
4
|
2006
|
34
|
John Paxson
|
2.70
|
1993
|
||||
34
|
Scott Williams
|
2.70
|
1993
|
||||
34
|
Stacey King
|
2.70
|
1993
|
One problem with the above approach is that role players can rack up titles playing with all-time greats (Robert Horry, Steve Kerr, Horace Grant, etc.) Perhaps a better one is to look at who contributes to the total, and award credit based on total production during the playoffs. The simplest method would be using points, and then more advanced versions add rebounds, assists, blocks, steals, etc. The logical conclusion is to use a method something that takes into account as much information as is possible. Thus, you give championship title credit based on how many wins shares a popular produces compared to the rest of the team.
The winner by this method is none other than Michael Jordan, and he wins in a landslide. He has 42 more percent than the second ranked player, Kobe Bryant. His lead is enormous, and it's apparent why -- he was the overwhelming force on six championships in the modern era. What Jordan did in the regular season was enough for him to be legendary, but in the post-season he made his name transcendent. Moving down the list the right names are near the top than in the other lists. Robert Horry is still ranked high, but he was a pretty good player, especially for the Rockets. I'm amazed Fisher is ranked so high, however. I tried to season with that by realizing there is one whole Win Share to go around, and a starter can easily take 0.1 of those Win Shares if he gets major minutes even without taking a ton of shots. Fisher won five titles, and on average he was decent so he totaled over half a title Win Share.
Rank
|
Player
|
Total adjusted Win Shares titles
|
Last title year
|
1
|
Michael Jordan
|
1.650
|
1998
|
2
|
Kobe Bryant
|
1.164
|
2010
|
3
|
Tim Duncan
|
1.139
|
2007
|
4
|
Scottie Pippen
|
1.035
|
1998
|
5
|
Shaquille O'Neal
|
1.026
|
2006
|
6
|
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
|
0.847
|
1988
|
7
|
Robert Horry
|
0.763
|
2007
|
8
|
George Mikan
|
0.684
|
1954
|
9
|
Larry Bird
|
0.684
|
1986
|
10
|
John Havlicek
|
0.645
|
1976
|
11
|
Magic Johnson
|
0.633
|
1988
|
12
|
Sam Jones
|
0.618
|
1969
|
13
|
Derek Fisher
|
0.552
|
2010
|
14
|
Bill Russell
|
0.549
|
1969
|
15
|
James Worthy
|
0.539
|
1988
|
16
|
Horace Grant
|
0.508
|
2001
|
17
|
Pau Gasol
|
0.498
|
2010
|
18
|
Tony Parker
|
0.497
|
2007
|
19
|
Hakeem Olajuwon
|
0.481
|
1995
|
20
|
Tom Heinsohn
|
0.478
|
1965
|
21
|
Manu Ginobili
|
0.442
|
2007
|
22
|
Dennis Johnson
|
0.412
|
1986
|
23
|
Jamaal Wilkes
|
0.395
|
1982
|
24
|
Toni Kukoc
|
0.394
|
1998
|
25
|
Ron Harper
|
0.367
|
2001
|
26
|
Kevin McHale
|
0.333
|
1986
|
27
|
Jim Pollard
|
0.332
|
1954
|
28
|
Michael Cooper
|
0.326
|
1988
|
29
|
Isiah Thomas
|
0.326
|
1990
|
30
|
Dwyane Wade
|
0.324
|
2006
|
31
|
Norm Nixon
|
0.323
|
1982
|
32
|
Dennis Rodman
|
0.318
|
1998
|
33
|
Byron Scott
|
0.309
|
1988
|
34
|
David Robinson
|
0.294
|
2003
|
35
|
Joe Dumars
|
0.276
|
1990
|
36
|
Rick Fox
|
0.263
|
2002
|
37
|
Robert Parish
|
0.253
|
1997
|
As a tangent, the "record" for highest proportion of Win Shares during a title playoff run is George Mikan in 1949 with an astounding 53.2 percent. Cliff Hagan in 1958 is next with 45.7 percent. Shaq has the modern record at 35.6 percent in 2000 with Tim Duncan close behind in 2003. On another tangent, the way Wins Shares are calculated a player can a negative number, which means he didn't even contribute to nothing; he's worse than that. Teammates Jim Cleamons and John Trapp hold the dubious distinction of lowest Win Shares for the playoffs while still winning a title with -0.018 in 1972 for the Lakers. Darko Milicic, by the way, wasn't far away at -0.011. Take that LeBron.
Awarding titles based on how many competitors you have also brings about the possibility to see adjusted title leaders by team. The Celtics are obviously hurt the most in this because they won most of theirs in the first couple decades of the league. The table below shows the adjusted leaders, and the Lakers take the top spot in this method. Even if you discount the Minneapolis Lakers years they still have the edge over the Celtics. Once again basketball fans are reminded that the titles are nearly all held by a few teams at the top. The NBA has been about dynasties, not parity and competitive balance.
Team
|
Total title shares
|
Lakers
|
11.20
|
Los
Angeles Lakers
|
9.27
|
Celtics
|
7.90
|
Bulls
|
5.60
|
Spurs
|
3.93
|
Pistons
|
2.70
|
Minneapolis
Lakers
|
1.93
|
Rockets
|
1.80
|
76ers/Nationals
|
1.37
|
Warriors
|
1.20
|
76ers
|
1.10
|
Knicks
|
1.03
|
Heat
|
1.00
|
Mavericks
|
1.00
|
Blazers
|
0.73
|
SuperSonics
|
0.73
|
Washington Bullets/Wizards
|
0.73
|
Bucks
|
0.57
|
Royals/Kings
|
0.37
|
Baltimore Bullets*
|
0.27
|
Hawks
|
0.27
|
Nationals
|
0.27
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)