DraftExpress: Don't Draft 2nd-half 1st-rounders

So you want to trade back into the draft and take a shooting guard in case Ben Gordon bolts, huh? You think trading Hinrich and/or Nocioni for spot at the 15th, 20th or 25th pick could pay big dividends down the road? Well, has a guide to drafting. It's mostly just statistical breakdown w/ little interpretation. Kind of.

The part I'm concerned with, as implied by the title of this post, is trading back into the late-lottery (11-14) and the mid-first round. I was all for using Hinrich or Nocioni to somehow get to these spots (although I'm also for keeping Hinrich around, so go figure), but now I'm a little more skeptical.

Production compared to where the player was drafted:


I. Location, Location, Location: Win the Lottery

Let’s start with the most obvious finding: where you pick matters a lot. Lottery players have better success rates than players in the bottom half of the first round. First rounders do better than second rounders. And players in the top half of the second round have better success rates than those at the end of the draft.

If a player is selected among the top quarter (currently the top 7 picks: we broke the round into “quarters” to control for the growth from 23 picks in 1980 to 30 this year) of first round picks in an average year (See Figure 1), the odds are about 60% he will be a solid starter or better by his fifth year. Those odds drop to 38% by the second quarter of the first round (i.e., picks 8-15 this year), and slip below 20% by the time you reach the bottom of the first round.

The odds of any player drafted between 16 and 30 this year becoming a star player, is about 1 in 13. In fact, you’re doing well if you get a guy who is even a solid bench contributor or a marginal starter once you get beyond the lottery picks. Nearly half the players drafted in the bottom half of the first round, are out of the league, or barely hanging on, five years after being drafted. --emphasis by authors

There's some really great information in there that basically says, "Don't expect anyone to really help this year" and ::gasp:: "PG's and wings have less bust potential than big men".

I invite everyone to read the rest, especially the last part about the big man bust. I have my own opinions on why this is the case (Hint: less PG's are taken for a reason), but I only wanted to address one point. (maybe someone else can address the last part and ignite more debate about Rose and Beasley) I'm already sold on Rose, and I was all about getting Rush or Lee or CDR in the 10-20 spots, but this makes me skeptical. Although, if they get someone in the 10-14 spots, there's a slightly better than 1 in 3 chance that player turns into a "solid starter" (check their definitions), and I wouldn't mind that w/ everything else the Bulls have.


FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.

Log In Sign Up

Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

By becoming a registered user, you are also agreeing to our Terms and confirming that you have read our Privacy Policy.

Join Blog a Bull

You must be a member of Blog a Bull to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Blog a Bull. You should read them.

Join Blog a Bull

You must be a member of Blog a Bull to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at Blog a Bull. You should read them.




Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.