Hollinger's new draft evaluations
by Scotter on Jun 20, 2008 4:19 PM CDT
Email
PrintJohn Hollinger changed his method of evaluating college big men. His new method projects a19 PER in year 3 of Beasley's NBA career.
The Sure Thing
Michael Beasley, Kansas State, 19.31
Beasley's rating is the highest of any player going back to 2002, and it's the best by a pretty sizable margin. Obviously, this isn't new information -- nobody doubts this guy's talent level.
But he might be even better than people realize. His numbers were superior even to Kevin Durant's from a year ago, and Durant had everyone gaga over his performance as a college freshman.
Somehow Beasley didn't resonate quite as strongly, perhaps because of concerns over his character, but if he keeps his head on straight he's going to be insanely good.
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.
58 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
He also says Tyrus was the best college big man in his draft class.
Figured tyrus lovers would like to hear that.
Also, Kevin Love is the second in his list of this year’s best college big men.
TT is 22
he will be very good, give the guy some time….
by JustAnotherFan on Jun 21, 2008 3:08 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, Hibbert is basically Gray with 2 more inches
and maybe even worse offensively. Though better defensively.
Basically a wash.
When I watch NBA games I often call the fouls before the referees do. Sometimes it’s a gift. Most of the time it's troublesome. - NBA Observer
big man in college, small man in the league
the center and power forward spots are probably the hardest to evaluate in basketball. think of all the superstar big men in college or high school who have come out and have been less than superstars in the league. so i would wait for him(beasley) to play his first game before i really try to evaluate what he is going to be, but i think he will become an all star one day.
Could Hollinger pick a more inaccurate system?
Gooden, Sweetney, Tyrus, Noah, Marvin, May, and Brandan Wright make his top 10, and he’s using that system to project for this season?
Hollinger is missing the boat here, bad. I’m going to make my own draft evaluator. He’s overlooking some obvious predictors.
Hollinger Shmollinger
"There is no 'i' in team, but there is in win."
--23
by Orlando Woolridge on Jun 21, 2008 1:16 AM CDT reply actions
"His numbers were superior even to Kevin Durant's".... yeah soo???
and yet keving durant was drafted 2nd for a reason!!!!... players with the ability to be the best at their position offensively and defensively (Oden and Rose) don’t come along very often. Beasley is gunna be torched defensively so comparing his numbers to kevin’s doesn’t justify him being picked number one. Look at who won the championship, Boston won it on solid defense… basically Scotter your post’s arguements for beasley are meaningless (altho he is good and deserving of the number 2 selection)
Does Hollinger not see
that Beasley is such an average athlete? 35 inch vert’ at 6’8’?
Yawn.
by RogersPark Kris on Jun 21, 2008 8:05 AM CDT reply actions
It's groupthink at its best. Irving Janis would be fascinated.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
Does google work
on your computer?
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
That's rich coming from you.
BTW, were you talking about the supposed Rose-love or the “HOLLINGER DOESN’T KNOW ANYTHING. I KNOW MORE THAN HIM!!KJ
”? I was thinking the latter is what you were laughing at.
I can't speak for Alec, but I was thinking Rose-love when I posted
the groupthink comment. It doesn’t make much sense if he was talking just about the Hollinger criticism.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
I get that some people go overboard on the Rose love
But majority of the commenters know Rose isn’t some head and shoulders supreme prospect. I just think Rose is a better fit for the Bulls.
by Ozzie Montana on Jun 21, 2008 9:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Many people have been at least semi-rational,
but read through all the comments again and count the ones that aren’t even trying. I find it especially humorous given the number of people who confess to not watching much college ball. Also, even though Rose was roughly a 3 to 1 choice around here from day one, you can trace from the day of the draft lottery up till the present how the comments have shifted from a bit of a preference for Rose to (many, not all) being much more extreme – Beasley has been turned into a ticking time bomb who plays no defense and doesn’t have a position while the question marks in Rose’s game get brushed off. The same arguments in favor of Rose get repeated ad nauseum, the arguments against Beasley get blown up (e.g. he’s gone from signing his name on the principal’s car to spray painting it, from being a bit immature to Rodman-in-waiting), and arguments in favor of Beasley get dismissed without much consideration. That’s classic groupthink.
If it makes you feel better, I’m not accusing you specifically of being part of it. However, I can pick it out enough that I’m planning on using this as an modern-day example in my Intro Sociology class next semester.
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
Here’s what I was laughing about.
Hollinger is a certified BaB deity.
He posts a piece doing all the Hollinger analysis he’s revered for…except Oh my God! he’s praising Beasley as the best big man his data base has ever churned out…and suddenly the Hollinger denunciations start rolling in.
I also think it’s funny that this thread has been up for over 24 hours and none of Hollinger’s high priests have put in a showing.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
Discredit the experts - check
I found it funny, too, especially since Hollinger’s piece was only looking at big men, so it’s not even remotely a comparison of Beasley and Rose. And to top it off, it’s big on Tyrus, which is usually hugely popular around here.
On a side note, do you find it at all alarming that we seem to suddenly be in agreement on a number of things? Thank god there’s still Kirk to disagree about! ; )
If nothing else, taking Rose will at least piss off Pat Riley.
This is where you two get lost.
you guys crack me up
Ignore everything that’s been said in pro and con about both and just focus on the things that you can sit at your computer and laugh at. Whatever floats your boat.
by tyger1147 on Jun 22, 2008 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
No kidding
There isn’t a right, proven, perfect way to assess draft prospects. We can’t even rely on simple, logical methods like just seeing if a player improved each season in college because there’s often only one season to look at.
Sounding the groupthink alarm, baiting “Hollinger’s high priests” (troll!), and whining about an imaginary route to a consensus opinion are all mistakes. If there’s a gap in logic it’s definitely on the individual. It’s not shocking at all that there a bunch of new, uninformed users bashing Hollinger, and repeating a player’s name over and over and again like it means something.
hey alec, don't troll
and it’s a weekend.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 22, 2008 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions
Trolling? No.
Sacreligious? Maybe.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
alec...
you, specifically, can’t be a jerk here.
(Who knew that Beasley’s magnetism could embolden you so!)
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 22, 2008 3:29 PM CDT up reply actions
OK, well, here...back to basketball
I found this quote for Kobe on SI.com:
””The rules are completely different now,’’ Bryant told me in November. “I’ve always been able to shoot the ball, but the rules have changed since he played in terms of playing a zone defense. You have to be a jump shooter now because there’s no way you can get to the basket—particularly myself because they just stack guys up. I wish we had the rules they had back in the day where you could isolate guys and you could go to the basket anytime. But now you have to be able to shoot.’‘
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/ian_thomsen/06/20/weekly.countdown/1.html
If Kobe (KOBE!) can’t get to the basket, what makes anyone think that Rose will be able to? Especially in the play-offs, where you’re going at it over and over again against the same opponent, and they’re game-planning you to death—you need a guy who can get it done in the half-court.
I think Beasley will be even more valuable for a team that plans on playing in the post-season.
Hollinger is right. Hyper athleticism (which I completely agree Rose has) may be great for the regular season, but the post-season is a completely different animal, and you need a guy who can put the ball in the basket against the most intense physical pressure.
Go back and have another look at the Beasley tapes. He was constantly double and triple teamed…and again and again he was able to find the only path to the basket.
As Paxson has said, there is an incredible premium in the league for guys who can score…and I think this is all the more true the higher up the standings you go…the further in the post-season you go.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
Chris Paul, Deron Williams, and Tony Parker
seem to be ok with the rule changes.
by RogersPark Kris on Jun 22, 2008 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions
that's exactly why quotes and anecdotal evidence are worthless
If someone could prove a significant inside FG% decline among guards and small forwards since the rule change, that would be grand.
The more consistent scoring non-bigs last season were penetrators who don’t actually shoot well, but get to the line.
That's because Alec intentionally left out...
...the part about how hand-checking on the perimeter now being against the rules and making it harder for perimeter defenders to keep their guys in check.
Yeah, that’s Alec for ya.
If you read the article I linked
you’d see that’s covered. The hand-check rule change permits more freedom to roam the perimeter.
The zone rule change allows teams to pack it inside against drivers like Kobe.
You watched the play-offs. Every step Kobe took in the paint he was coming face-to face with a Celtic defender.
This is why Kobe’s saying you have to be able to shoot a jump shot.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
I did read the article.
That’s why I mentioned it. You didn’t mention it because it doesn’t support yours, or Kobe’s argument. The handchecking thing makes it easier for players to penetrate, not harder. The zone might make it harder, but it evens out. You, like most people, left off half of the argument to make your point. It’s why you rarely get anything right. You acknowledge something that supports your argument while forgetting something that doesn’t. A classic example of selective memory.
I watched every minute
and surprisingly, the “best player on the planet” couldn’t get by Pierce, nor could he stop Pierce from getting to the rim. The zone is nothing new in basketball; you attack a man one way, a zone another. Kobe’s problems came more from his and his teammates underachieving in some of the really deep, sophisticated, technical aspects of the game, like boxing out, making open shots and taking away your man’s strong hand.
by California Al on Jun 23, 2008 12:54 AM CDT up reply actions
Looking at that top ten,
only Iverson is Rose’s size or smaller…and for all the smacking around he gets, it’s a wonder he’s still standing.
The next biggest guy is DWade, and he’s probably spent half his career on the injured list.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
Didn't Tony Parker win a Finals MVP by getting into the lane nonstop
Against one of the better defensive teams no less. Obviously that’s a by-product of the Cavs worrying about Duncan as well, but I don’t think it’s just as easy as “zone up and stop penetration.” Most offenses have enough shooters to break a zone down. I mean, isn’t the whole hype of Rose that he will drive into the lane, force teams to collapse on him, and dish it out for a good look? I know what you’re trying to say about Beasley, but the argument doesn’t make sense.
by Ozzie Montana on Jun 22, 2008 6:31 PM CDT up reply actions
I agree with you on the Rose hype.
However, I have serious reservations about who will be on the receiving end of those passes off his drives. Who’s Rose going to throw the ball to who’s shown he has any idea of what to do with it?
Yes, we know Gordon almost certainly will be able to score—but he’s lobbying like hell to get out of town…and according to our impeccable BaB sources, Reinsdorf has already let it be know Gordon shouldn’t be checking his mailbox for that new contract from the Bulls.
Maybe Deng?—who’s already shown he can’t do anything under game pressure.
Tyrus?—maybe, if he’s a completely different player than he has been for his first two years in the league.
Other than one-trick-pony Gordon, there’s not a single scorer on the team.
And scoring does matter.
Nobody’s projections are perfect. Perfection is not in the nature of percentages. But there’s a reason that Hollinger has been a hero of this site for a ling time. I think it’s foolish to suddenly doubt him about this. He’s not talking about some mid-pack numbers guy who he’s taking a flyer on.
He’s talking about the best fulfillment of his methodology he’s ever crunched.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
So, you don't take Rose because
nobody on the team will know what to do with the ball when he delivers it in an advantage situation? Do you also skip Beasley because nobody on the team will be looking to deliver it to him? Maybe the right pick is Mayo, as the best shoot-first point guard in the draft? Won’t be dependent on his teammates doing their jobs.
by California Al on Jun 23, 2008 12:58 AM CDT up reply actions
I said at the top that I tend to trust Hollinger
I’m hoping that today he comes out with his numbers for the back court players.
Maybe he’ll have Rose rated above Beasley. Or, even if he still ranks Beasley higher, maybe he will offer a good reason to draft Rose ahead of Beasley.
Dum spiro spero! (While there is life, there’s hope!)--Leon Trotsky
how to really judge a big man in the league...
ok, for big men going into the league we should take their college scoring and rebounding averages. take 8 points off of the college scoring average(2 points per quarter) and take 4 off their college rebounding average(1 per quarter) and that is what they should probably do if they are really good in their first year. so beasley averaged 26 and 12 in college, so in the league his first year averages should be around18 and 8. i just made this up so i hope it turns out to be right. lol
Fire Hollinger!
We have a new basketball scientist in town.
heh.
management sez: recommend fanposts/fanshots/comments! Click 'reply' when replying to a comment! Flag jerkfaces!
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jun 22, 2008 11:55 AM CDT up reply actions
Well, Hollinger also projected that Gooden would have a third year PER of
18.17 (better than Carlos Boozer and Kevin Durant and Dwayne Wade and Carmelo Anthony and Deron Williams) and that Michael Sweetney – yes, THAT Sweetney – would have a third year PER of 17.04 (better than Noah and Tyrus and Deng).
So I don’t have a great deal of faith in the relevance or accuracy of these PER predictions.
The mere fact that Sweetney’s prediction was so high indicates that the PER model fails to account for a player’s proclivity for getting fat.
LSU 38 OHIO STATE 24 - LSU IS THE NATIONAL CHAMPION AND I AM THE KING OF BOURBON STREET!!
The thing is- when doing stats
Is basketball is not like baseball- which is why head-to-head matchups- and gut reactions matter more. Regression analysis and all that is great, if the stats are indicative. You make the argument that rebounds is a good one. Because, hey does the guy go get rebounds or not? But we don’t track clutch rebounds. So rodman would look good, but he wouldn’t look as good as he really was, which is that when you are an important playoff game, he STILL gets the rebound.
Same with Rose- we know he played in an offense, the dribble drive motion, where assists are under tracked, because the man he dishes to is SUPPOSED to drive himself, negating the original assist, as tracked, but not Rose’s value in creating space.
http://ballhype.com/story/breakdown_memphis_dribble_drive_offense_with_derrick/
So back to results- there is a ton of value, that for some reason Rose is the best player on all these WINNING teams. And Beasley wasn’t in that situation. And there is alot of value in the opposite. Beasley had issues wherever he went. And his teams didn’t win big.
Thats real.
Also, Hollingers stats predict which guys stat sheets look good. NOT WHICH GUYS TEAMS WIN. PER does not predict winning. It shows stat filling. We could start tracking a more subjective list of stats- clutch rebounds, blow bys, ankle breakers, and whoa dude, how did he do that moves. Along with blown defense, took a play off, and went right when he should have gone left. But until we do, Hollinger and the rest of them are bravely making do with the less arguable stats. Yes he caught the ball, rebound. Yes, he passed it to him, and he shot and scored, assist.
Until then, Im with Rose, because I think the fact that he was in championship games as the best player on either team matters, and the fact that Beasley wasn’t matter too.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Create-a-Caption: ‘Vengeance is mine,’ quoth Alvis
- Roy Hibbert wants to play for Team USA, seeks release from Jamaican national team
- Bucks forward Jon Brockman loves wearing adult onesies
- Andrew Bynum after 9-0 Thunder run beats Lakers: ‘We’re better than Santa Claus’
- Walter McCarty, former Celtics forward and Pacers coach, takes to the music industry
