Article on likelihood of getting a star in the NBA draft

[Dr Tigris]

Thought this might interest people.

Ran across this video on fivethirtyeight on the NBA draft.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...not-picking-the-best-player-in-the-nba-draft/

Core take away for me is that the NBA drafts 20-22 year olds that have been in an effectively professional environment for 3-4 years. So they are basically known prospects. And you have about 30% chance of hitting the jackpot in the first 5 picks. Given we are picking kids from a much smaller pool in the AFL the chances are likely lesser of getting that star player.

But, the value of a draft pick drops of dramatically as you go down draft picks. So the top picks are worth a huge amount more. However, even then you don't know whether you are getting a hit. After the first-ish round the value of picks levels off. So people fighting over pick 42 vs 52 are likely fighting over not very much at all.

Just puts it in context. Only when you have the sweep of picks in a year (GC and GWS) can you expect to get a few major hits. otherwise, the higher the better. But expect more misses than hits.

It more likely is that first round draft picks will be serviceable AFL players. That's just the way it is.

 

[Orange Agent]

Cliffs on the video for those that cant be bothered watching it?

Off the top of my head I dont know what they are classifying as a jackpot but when you are comparing sports with a starting 5 Vs 18 there are invariably issues with opportunity and reaching full potential particuarly with the pigeion holeing of player positions associated with basketball. Its is also one of the more individual dominated team sports going around and being classified a non-contact sport means likelihood of inury is reduced further diminsihing the chance for opportunity. Other than training what type of development do bench players get? There is no reserves league, some can spend most of the season sitting on thier ass.

 

[SterlingArcher]

I don't know what count as a 'jackpot is but I'd say there's a 40% chance of getting a star in the top 5 of the draft. Even better if you take into account a players best form before injuries (i.e. Cooney, Thomas)

2000 - Riewoldt
2001 - Hodge, Ball, Judd
2002 - Goddard
2003 - Cooney
2004 - Deledio, Roughead, Griffen, Franklin
2005 - Murphy, Thomas, Kennedy, Pendlebury
2006 - Gibbs, Boak
2007 - Cotchin
2008 - Naitanui, Hurley
2009 - Martin

20 of 50 top 5 picks would be considered stars or better when not factoring in injury ruining careers from the 00's drafts.

2010 onwards still too young to judge.

For picks 6-10
2000 - nil
2001 - Bartel
2002 - nil
2003 - nil
2004 - Lewis
2005 - nil
2006 - Selwood
2007 - Dangerfield
2008 - nil
2009 - nil

4/50 - very low. Heaps of duds. Few guys like Ryder who show why it's probably best to judge based off games (i.e. 150) played.

For picks 11-20
2000 - Burgoyne
2001 - nil
2002 - nil
2003 - nil
2004 - nil
2005 - nil
2006 - Riewoldt
2007 - Rioli, Taylor, Rance
2008 - nil
2009 - Talia, Fyfe

3.5/50

Top 5 picks are by far the best. Even removing Gibbs, Thomas, Cooney, Naitanui, Cotchin if people wanted to, still flogs the 6-20 picks.

 

[BLERN]

Cliffs on the video for those that cant be bothered watching it?

Off the top of my head I dont know what they are classifying as a jackpot but when you are comparing sports with a starting 5 Vs 18 there are invariably issues with opportunity and reaching full potential particuarly with the pigeion holeing of player positions associated with basketball. Its is also one of the more individual dominated team sports going around and being classified a non-contact sport means likelihood of inury is reduced further diminsihing the chance for opportunity. Other than training what type of development do bench players get? There is no reserves league, some can spend most of the season sitting on thier ass.

Sitting on their ass during a game sure. But training with some of the best players is one of the best ways to work on aspects of your game.

Plus for a "non-contact" sport, its surprising how physical it is. I had to stop playing footy bball and cricket due to a seriously bad ankle injury. Took me about 11 months to recover from.

 

[briztoon]

Cliffs on the video for those that cant be bothered watching it?

Off the top of my head I dont know what they are classifying as a jackpot but when you are comparing sports with a starting 5 Vs 18 there are invariably issues with opportunity and reaching full potential particuarly with the pigeion holeing of player positions associated with basketball. Its is also one of the more individual dominated team sports going around and being classified a non-contact sport means likelihood of inury is reduced further diminsihing the chance for opportunity. Other than training what type of development do bench players get? There is no reserves league, some can spend most of the season sitting on thier ass.

It's not exactly a reserve league, but the NBA does have a minor league called the D (Developmental) League. Well name has now changed to G League. You can send 2 guys down your development club at any one time.

Typically in most games, 10 players out of the 15 man roster, is going to get some playing time.

 

[Teflon Dons]

Thought this might interest people.

Ran across this video on fivethirtyeight on the NBA draft.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...not-picking-the-best-player-in-the-nba-draft/

Core take away for me is that the NBA drafts 20-22 year olds that have been in an effectively professional environment for 3-4 years. So they are basically known prospects. And you have about 30% chance of hitting the jackpot in the first 5 picks. Given we are picking kids from a much smaller pool in the AFL the chances are likely lesser of getting that star player.

But, the value of a draft pick drops of dramatically as you go down draft picks. So the top picks are worth a huge amount more. However, even then you don't know whether you are getting a hit. After the first-ish round the value of picks levels off. So people fighting over pick 42 vs 52 are likely fighting over not very much at all.

Just puts it in context. Only when you have the sweep of picks in a year (GC and GWS) can you expect to get a few major hits. otherwise, the higher the better. But expect more misses than hits.

It more likely is that first round draft picks will be serviceable AFL players. That's just the way it is.

Out of all the number 2 picks in the NBA over the last 2 decades, 4 have gone on to be an All-Star.
"Picking 2nd is almost always a strikeout"
Sam Bowie over MJ is arguably the most significant f*** up.

How have the 2nd picks of the AFL over the last 20 years fared??
Who has been the most blatant fup?

I'll start with O'Rourke at 2 in 2012, Kozi and Ball over Judd.

 

[Bostonian]

Thought this might interest people.

Ran across this video on fivethirtyeight on the NBA draft.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features...not-picking-the-best-player-in-the-nba-draft/

Core take away for me is that the NBA drafts 20-22 year olds that have been in an effectively professional environment for 3-4 years. So they are basically known prospects. And you have about 30% chance of hitting the jackpot in the first 5 picks. Given we are picking kids from a much smaller pool in the AFL the chances are likely lesser of getting that star player.

But, the value of a draft pick drops of dramatically as you go down draft picks. So the top picks are worth a huge amount more. However, even then you don't know whether you are getting a hit. After the first-ish round the value of picks levels off. So people fighting over pick 42 vs 52 are likely fighting over not very much at all.

Just puts it in context. Only when you have the sweep of picks in a year (GC and GWS) can you expect to get a few major hits. otherwise, the higher the better. But expect more misses than hits.

It more likely is that first round draft picks will be serviceable AFL players. That's just the way it is.

Well that's not really true.

It's nearly always the one and done or second year players that get taken in the lottery.

This year was a record for Freshmen taken. 19 is the most common age in the first round.

It's almost like the longer you stay in college the less chance you have to get drafted these days.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Out of all the number 2 picks in the NBA over the last 2 decades, 4 have gone on to be an All-Star.
"Picking 2nd is almost always a strikeout"
Sam Bowie over MJ is arguably the most significant f*** up.

How have the 2nd picks of the AFL over the last 20 years fared??
Who has been the most blatant fup?

I'll start with O'Rourke at 2 in 2012, Kozi and Ball over Judd.

Plenty of not so awesome pick 2's. But what I found interesting is that curve shows value diminishing fairly quickly then leveling off. Whilst at the same time you had about a 30% chance of a 'star'. So top picks are very valuable, so worth getting if possible. However they are not in any way guaranteed. You can expect someone decent for a top 5 pick.

That is, the NBA draft seems to show something similar to what I believe about the AFL draft. Top picks help hugely in getting quality. But it is very easy to overvalue a top pick - in isolation. Having multiple picks in one draft is a huge benefit (GWS/GC). Otherwise we tend to put too much emphasis on how high the pick is. But looking at the portfolio of picks you want to be in that part of the curve where it is dropping quickly, not where it flattens out. So paying overs for an early pick makes sense. Putting any extra value between pick 50 and 60 is silly. IMHO.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Well that's not really true.

It's nearly always the one and done or second year players that get taken in the lottery.

This year was a record for Freshmen taken. 19 is the most common age in the first round.

It's almost like the longer you stay in college the less chance you have to get drafted these days.

I'm not an expert on the NBA draft. But I take it that the NBA teams take the most talented players as early as they can. But they are proven in the College system.

My point was for the AFL that a similar dynamic is likely to exist. And that if you can value picks sensibly you are more likely to do better.

E.g. in trading not caring about losing pick 48 and getting pick 65 back. But really going hard for picks inside 20/25. And accepting that you are unlikely to get a star. So drafting with more a portfolio view than hitting every pick. I suspect the clubs do this, and most BF posters don't get it as a portfolio of picks.