How Great is the 2017 draft class?

[slinslin]

NBA is totally different than college though. #1 overall picks in a good draft not even making the tournament isn't something that happens regularly.

I'm not saying Fultz is a loser but UW ought to be better than they are.

UW was not a good team last year, lost Marquese Chriss and Dejounte Murray and got Markell Fultz. No they should not be better than they are.

 

[slinslin]

Last year UCLA was sub .500.

Yeah but that is an exception for UCLA, they still had a talented roster and did not lose anyone really.

 

[AzStevenCal]

because his team is himself and no other player with pro-basketball hopes and Washington does not run a system that racks up easy wins without talent.

Does anyone want to argue that Anthony Davis is freaking good?

Of course not but who is arguing that Fultz isn't good? Fultz is good now and he's going to be good at the next level. I just don't think he's going to be great, more like a cross between the two Portland guards. That's good, that's very good. But IMO Markkanen and Ball have a better chance of becoming great NBA players.

 

[slinslin]

I could smile and ignore someone thinking Ball has a better chance but saying that about Markkanen is Trump-level crazy talk.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I could smile and ignore someone thinking Ball has a better chance but saying that about Markkanen is Trump-level crazy talk.

While it certainly isn't the popular opinion, the idea that Markkanen might have a better chance to be great than Fultz is hardly worthy of such a description. I know most of the draft rankers still put Fultz as the top choice but it's pretty clear that there is doubt in the ranks now. Granted, it's Ball or Jackson that most are looking at but we'll see how it plays out.

 

[Russ Smith]

UW was not a good team last year, lost Marquese Chriss and Dejounte Murray and got Markell Fultz. No they should not be better than they are.

They lost Andrews too we've played this game before.

They are 2-11 in conference 9-16 overall. They are more talented than WSU who is 4-9 11-14, the only kid WSU has who would start for UW is Hawkinson. UW of late has an excuse, Dime is out injured, they're 1-9 since he got hurt, lacking size inside, but they're not that bad they're simply not playing well. They are less than the individual parts.

 

[Russ Smith]

Yeah but that is an exception for UCLA, they still had a talented roster and did not lose anyone really.

Well they lost their starting 5 and starting 4(Parker and Bolden) but I consider Parker addition by subtraction and Bolden left for academics largely because once he saw how good Ball and Leaf were in the summer games at UCLA, he stopped going to summerschool and started looking for a pro team realizing Ball was going to guard the 3(where Bolden wanted to play) and Leaf was the 4(where Bolden would have played).

So we knew they were going to be better but nobody saw this coming.

 

[Phrazbit]

Lorenzo Romar is a terrible coach, great recruiter though. And by virtue of being the godfather of next year's #1 recruit (and having the kids dad on UW's staff) he won't get fired despite another dismal season.

Despite Romar, I do think they should be better with Fultz, their 2015 recruit class was really really deep and even with the loses to the NBA they still have kids that were viewed as quality, but I can't lay too much on Fultz. The Huskies have been inept for 5 years, the only mystery is why kids keep going there.

 

[sunsfan88]

While it certainly isn't the popular opinion, the idea that Markkanen might have a better chance to be great than Fultz is hardly worthy of such a description. I know most of the draft rankers still put Fultz as the top choice but it's pretty clear that there is doubt in the ranks now. Granted, it's Ball or Jackson that most are looking at but we'll see how it plays out.

I'm not sold on Ball yet. His form is so damn ugly, I don't know if he will be able to consistently make that in the NBA. It's a pretty slow release too.

And in today's NBA, if you don't have a good 3pt shot, your ceiling is basically average unless your a freak of nature athletically which Ball isn't.

I don't know if it's even possible to completely drastically change his form like that too.

 

[slinslin]

for you Ball fans

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

His shot is definitely a huge concern. He has a poor FT% which is a strong indicator that he is not a good shooter, coupled with bad numbers off the dribble to cement that.

3pt% is not a good indicator for shooting ability in college, it has not translated well in the past and there are more concerns with Ball. An ugly and low release means he needs more space to get his shot off. In college he shoots 3 feet from behind the line.

How much space will he need to do that against NBA defenders that are quicker, taller and better. Is he going to take 40 footers and can he make that?

 

[AzStevenCal]

His shot is definitely a huge concern. He has a poor FT% which is a strong indicator that he is not a good shooter, coupled with bad numbers off the dribble to cement that.

3pt% is not a good indicator for shooting ability in college, it has not translated well in the past and there are more concerns with Ball. An ugly and low release means he needs more space to get his shot off. In college he shoots 3 feet from behind the line.

How much space will he need to do that against NBA defenders that are quicker, taller and better. Is he going to take 40 footers and can he make that?

You make it sound like free throw shooting tells us everything and 3 point percentage means nothing but that's far from accurate. And in Ball's case it's almost completely meaningless.

3 point accuracy for primary ball handlers often does actually serve as a fairly accurate indicator. Where it loses it's validity has to do with the shorter distance and the fact the shooter is dependent on how the ball gets to him and other factors that are eliminated for the free throw shooter.

But when you have enough information to eliminate those other issues, 3 point shooting becomes an even better barometer than free throw percentage is. And since Ball takes his 3 point shots from NBA range and his numbers aren't artificially lowered by having to grab the ball at his ankles and so on, his percentage should translate unless he's no longer able to get clean looks and is no longer able to get a clean release. I don't see either as a problem.

 

[slinslin]

Ball is hardly a primary ball handler, he has a usage of 18% only that is far far far lower than the average "primary ball handler". You will have to search a long time to find a guard with such low usage numbers in the lottery or even first round. Tyler Ennis is the closest I could find.

He is taking his 3s from NBA range because he needs the space, in the NBA he will likely take 3s that are farther away from the line too. It does not reduce the concern at all.


Usage%
Ball 18%
Monk 27.2%
Fultz 31.1%
Smith 27.2%
Fox 25.8%
D'Angelo Russell 30.2%
Kriss Dunn 28%
Devin Booker 22.8%
Elfrid Payton 27.6%
Kyrie Irving 26.4%
John Wall 25.7%
Damian Lillard 33%
Kendall Marshall 27.8%
Tyler Ennis 21.9%
C.J. McCollum 37.2%
Cameron Payne 31.9%
Marcus Smart 29.2%

Assist%
Monk 12%
Ball 30.8%
Fultz 35.1%
Smith 37.3%
Fox 30.6%
D'angelo Russell 30.1%
Kris Dunn 41.8%
Devin Booker 10.9%
Elfrid Payton 32.9%
Kyrie Irving 29.8%
John wall 34.8%
Damian Lillard 27.1%
Kendall Marshall 45.1%
Tyler Ennis 32.3%
C.J. McCollum 24.9%
Cameron Payne 37.5%
Marcus Smart 30.1%

Turnover%
Monk 10.9%
Ball 18%
Fultz 13.1%
Smith 16.4%
Fox 13.7%
D'angelo Russell 14.8%
Kris Dunn 18.8%
Devin Booker 10.4%
Elfrid Payton 17.2%
Kyrie Irving 16.4%
John Wall 21.4%
Damian Lillard 10.7%
Kendall Marshall 27.8%
Tyler Ennis 11.9%
CJ McCollum 12.3%
Cameron Payne 9.7%
Marcus Smart 14%

 

[AzStevenCal]

Ball is hardly a primary ball handler, he has a usage of 18% only that is far far far lower than the average "primary ball handler".

He is taking his 3s from NBA range because he needs the space, in the NBA he will likely take 3s that are farther away from the line too. It does not reduce the concern at all.

Well, in this case, the primary ball handler part of it is also irrelevant, that concern is used to explain away lower percentages at the college level. I just mentioned it because it's a big part of why they've started using free throws to predict long distance shooting because it's a more level playing field for all the shooters. It doesn't punish someone for being an off the ball shooter who is reliant on someone else to get him the ball where and when he wants it.

But in Ball's case, his percentage should ring true because he typically takes his 3's from NBA distance. He's not just standing in the corner taking short 3's. You can keep trying to claim that he won't be able to get his outside shot off and perhaps you're right but it has nothing to do with the validity of his 3 point percentage or the trend to look at free throw stats to gauge a shooter's effectiveness.

 

[Russ Smith]

for you Ball fans

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

His shot is definitely a huge concern. He has a poor FT% which is a strong indicator that he is not a good shooter, coupled with bad numbers off the dribble to cement that.

3pt% is not a good indicator for shooting ability in college, it has not translated well in the past and there are more concerns with Ball. An ugly and low release means he needs more space to get his shot off. In college he shoots 3 feet from behind the line.

How much space will he need to do that against NBA defenders that are quicker, taller and better. Is he going to take 40 footers and can he make that?

So then you're off the Fultz bandwagon too right? I mean Ball is shooting .671 from the FT line, Fultz .644 so clearly Fultz and shooting are going to be a problem going forward because FT% is a good predictor of future shooting. He's at .639 in conference play so he's getting worse, FG% down 3% down, assists down, turnovers up.

And now there's rumors Fultz isn't even going to finish the year at UW, he's sat out 2 games recently with a "sore knee", Romar is insisting the doctors are stopping Fultz from playing it's not his decision, but there are rumblings that Fultz is just not that interested in playing out the season with more losses, and is simply choosing to not play.

 

[slinslin]

FT% with Fultz is a concern but unlike Ball he is scoring consistently on jumpers off the dribble too.

assists down, turnovers up? Over what? 3 games? Overall he has a better assist rate and far lower turnover rate than Ball.

 

[Russ Smith]

FT% with Fultz is a concern but unlike Ball he is scoring consistently on jumpers off the dribble too.

assists down, turnovers up? Over what? 3 games? Overall he has a better assist rate and far lower turnover rate than Ball.

In conference games most of his numbers are down, FG%, 3% FT%, ASsists. Turnovers are up. That is in the games against conference opponents who have a tape on him and for the most part are better than their OOC opponents, his performance has gone down.

And again, there's now enough talk that he's tanked the season and won't play anymore that Percy Allen who covers UW for many years, openly asked Romar yesterday if it was true that Fultz had played his last game at UW and Romar denied it and then refused to answer if he'll play Thur against ASU or even Saturday against UA saying it's up to the doctors.

Talented kid but the way the 2nd half of his 8 months in college is going is NOT a good sign for an NBA prospect. His performance is off. The only number up in conference games is PPG and that's because he's playing more minutes and taking more shots(and missing a higher % of them).

He doesn't have a better assist rate he has a higher % of his teams assists which stands to reason since he ALWAYS has the ball. Lonzo gets the rebound and before he's even landed, he's passed the ball to a teammate to push the ball upcourt faster. That's why his usage is so low he gives the ball up to benefit the team, Fultz doesn't he keeps the ball. Look at your own stats he has the ball 13% more than Ball does and averages less assists playing in a system that just runs up and down the court.

When the game is on the line for UCLA there's Lonzo front and center leading his team back to win against Oregon. Fultz doesn't do that and right now it looks like he's just not interested in playing anymore.

 

[slinslin]

He doesn't have a better assist rate he has a higher % of his teams assists which stands to reason since he ALWAYS has the ball.

Assist rate measures how many teammates field goals a player assists while he is on the floor, not how many assists a player has of the teams total assists and the high turnover rate is alarming at low usage.

The discussion about Fultz is the same fake argument as last year about Simmons.

 

[Russ Smith]

UW averages 13 APG, Fultz 6 so 46% of their assists come from him. That doesn't mean he's some amazing playmaker it means he ALWAYS has the ball when he's in the game.

They don't have another PG on the roster, in the 2 games without him they got 22 assists total or 4 less than they average with him, so a loss of 2 APG.

If Lonzo sat out a game I think we can both agree UCLA would lose more than 2 assists.

He's a ball dominant PG. For the year Fultz has 72 TO's, Ball has 65, and Ball has played just over 80 more minutes(the 2 games Fultz missed) so played more, less turnovers and you're alarmed by Lonzo's turnover rate?

Usage doesn't effectively measure Ball because if you get the rebound and pass it immediately in the backcourt it's not a possession where you get recorded for usage, unless the pass is a turnover. It also doesn't measure hockey assists a stat if kept I would wager Lonzo would look at least twice as good as Fultz does because Lonzo is so eager to advance the ball even if someone else gets the assist.

There was a game recently where at the half Lonzo had more hockey assists than assists, 5 to 4, there's a guy on Bruin Report Online who's been tracking it he says in most games Lonzo has more hockey assists by himself than the entire other team has. Ball movement is a huge part of why UCLA's offense is so good this year and it's because they have a guy who passes the ball rather than stopping it.

 

[slinslin]

Turnover rate is not measured by minutes, it is measured by posessions and shows how many turnovers the player would commit per 100 posessions.

Of course Lonzo would lead in hockey assists, just look at the system UCLA plays and the amount of shooters they have.

Fultz is +9 in BPM (Boxscore Plus Minus) on that terrible team. Dime and Thybulle are at +4 everyone else is negative or below 1.

fultz offensive rating is 117, Washingtons team offensive rating is 106 that is an incredible difference and shows how bad Washington is in the minutes Fultz is not playing to be 11 below their offensve total compared to their offense with Fultz.

Washington shoots 45% as a team. UCLA shoots 53%.

 

[DWKB]

Matt Norlander@MattNorlander

Is that Josh Jackson or Kevin Love. https://t.co/LzHNoL9V49

2/13/2017, 8:43:00 PM

 

[Russ Smith]

Turnover rate is not measured by minutes, it is measured by posessions and shows how many turnovers the player would commit per 100 posessions.

Of course Lonzo would lead in hockey assists, just look at the system UCLA plays and the amount of shooters they have.

Fultz is +9 in BPM (Boxscore Plus Minus) on that terrible team. Dime and Thybulle are at +4 everyone else is negative or below 1.

fultz offensive rating is 117, Washingtons team offensive rating is 106 that is an incredible difference and shows how bad Washington is in the minutes Fultz is not playing to be 11 below their offensve total compared to their offense with Fultz.

Washington shoots 45% as a team. UCLA shoots 53%.

Now you're just confusing me. Per 100 possessions Ball 3.8 TOV, Fultz 4.8. If 3.8 is alarming what is 4.8?

Ball has a MUCH higher offensive rating than Fultz does 132.5. as for "the way UCLA plays" you do realize they play that way ENTIRELY because they have Lonzo now? They didn't play that way last year, they didn't even play that way when they had Kyle Anderson, we pushed the ball but not like this year. It's entirely because of Lonzo that UCLA can play this way.

part of why UCLA shoots such a higher % is Lonzo, Alford career highs across the board in shooting, he gets guys good shots. The reason he leads in hockey assists is he passes the ball FAR more often than Fultz does it's a part of the way he plays. In the Oregon game they were marvelling about it he kept getting a defensive rebound and before his feet hit the ground he'd hit the ball ahead to Holiday or Bryce, the announcers were just amazed that such a great player and playmaker is so concerned with pushing the ball up that he's giving it up in the air to get the ball going forward, he's done that all year. That's not a feature of how UCLA plays it's how lonzo plays, they won't be doing that next year when he's gone.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

FT% with Fultz is a concern but unlike Ball he is scoring consistently on jumpers off the dribble too.

assists down, turnovers up? Over what? 3 games? Overall he has a better assist rate and far lower turnover rate than Ball.

Fultz is going to have a higher Ast% because he has the ball in his hands more. As can be seen by his 31% usage as compared to Lonzo's 18%. I find Ball's numbers to be especially good considering that low usage rate.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

Now you're just confusing me. Per 100 possessions Ball 3.8 TOV, Fultz 4.8. If 3.8 is alarming what is 4.8?

Ball has a MUCH higher offensive rating than Fultz does 132.5. as for "the way UCLA plays" you do realize they play that way ENTIRELY because they have Lonzo now? They didn't play that way last year, they didn't even play that way when they had Kyle Anderson, we pushed the ball but not like this year. It's entirely because of Lonzo that UCLA can play this way.

part of why UCLA shoots such a higher % is Lonzo, Alford career highs across the board in shooting, he gets guys good shots. The reason he leads in hockey assists is he passes the ball FAR more often than Fultz does it's a part of the way he plays. In the Oregon game they were marvelling about it he kept getting a defensive rebound and before his feet hit the ground he'd hit the ball ahead to Holiday or Bryce, the announcers were just amazed that such a great player and playmaker is so concerned with pushing the ball up that he's giving it up in the air to get the ball going forward, he's done that all year. That's not a feature of how UCLA plays it's how lonzo plays, they won't be doing that next year when he's gone.

TOV% is tied directly to usage rate. So therefore for every 100 plays that count towards a player's usage Ball turns the ball over approximately 5 more time. Your looking at per 100 possession numbers and quite a few of those possessions won't count towards that players usage.

 

[Russ Smith]

TOV% is tied directly to usage rate. So therefore for every 100 plays that count towards a player's usage Ball turns the ball over approximately 5 more time. Your looking at per 100 possession numbers and quite a few of those possessions won't count towards that players usage.

Right but that's my point, if Lonzo gets the rebound and passes it ahead it's not counted in usage unless the pass ahead is a turnover.

Per actual 100 possessions, Ball turns it over less than Fultz does. Lots of those are the get board pass it ahead count that are real possessiosn but don't count in usage, unless he turns it over.

There's another guy out there who is trying to push True USage % and I would imagine if you used that for Lonzo Ball, his numbers would go up because one of the reasons they guy is pushing his stat is he says players who get hockey assists don't get properly accounted for in usage %.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

Right but that's my point, if Lonzo gets the rebound and passes it ahead it's not counted in usage unless the pass ahead is a turnover.

Per actual 100 possessions, Ball turns it over less than Fultz does. Lots of those are the get board pass it ahead count that are real possessiosn but don't count in usage, unless he turns it over.

There's another guy out there who is trying to push True USage % and I would imagine if you used that for Lonzo Ball, his numbers would go up because one of the reasons they guy is pushing his stat is he says players who get hockey assists don't get properly accounted for in usage %.

It counts as usage if it is a turnover or an assist. Hockey assists are about the most difficult thing to tally and is why they aren't used. It can already be confusing as to what is or isn't an assist to begin with and then trying to determine what is or isn't a hockey assist would be damn near impossible IMO. Lonzo does take some chances with the ball and thus per play used he is going to turn the ball over more than Fultz, but what I find truly impressive about Lonzo is that he averages the points and assists that he does with that usage rate.