Sheldon Williams is not top 5 material

[DrReality]

by Richard Lu, 6/14/06

About a week ago, I rented Leon Gast’s follow up to When We Were Kings (great movie, if you haven’t seen it). It was basketball documentary entitled 1 Love. It was a little disappointing because it tried to do too much in too short a time frame. However, one line did really stick out to me. Hubie Brown was addressed some high schoolers at a camp and said, “To make it in The Show, you have to have either a game or a specialty.”

This quote coupled with my never-ending fascination for the draft inspired me to do a little study to see if there was a quantifiable way to determine which college players in this year’s draft had the best chance to succeed in the NBA.

So, I decided to compare this group of potential draftees from the NCAA Division I level and compared them to players in the past using Similarity Scores. Then from that, I was able to calculate their success rates.

Defining the pool of players posed a small challenge because the three-point was introduced in the college game in the 1986-87 season. Therefore, I chose the 1990 draft as the starting point to keep the number of seasons before 1986-87 to a minimum, while making the pool as large as possible. Then, the 2003 draft was the cut off point because it’s still a little too early to fully evaluate the quality of the 2004 and 2005 drafts. To do that, it takes three years to get a pretty accurate evaluation.

The Similarity Scores were calculated based on fourteen categories, which are listed below:

Height

Weight

Age

Minutes per Game

Total Games Played

Three-Point Efficiency

Free-Throw Efficiency

Two-Point Efficiency

Assist Rate

Turnover Rate

Rebound per 48 Minutes

Blocks per 48 Minutes

Steals per 48 Minutes

Personal Fouls per 48 Minutes

The maximum score is 1000 and a significant comparison would fall in the range between 800 and 1000. So, to come up with a success rate, I analyzed every comparable player that was in that range using Minutes per Game and basic production metrics like PER as the primary factors and assigned a point value to them. They are as follows:

1 – Definite All-Star, Elite Level Player (ex. Kidd, Shaq, Iverson)

0.75 – Borderline All-Star, Second Tier Player (ex. Abdur-Rahim, Antoine Walker)

0.5 – Starter, min. 25 MPG

0.25 – Borderline Starter, Bench Player, 15 MPG – 25 MPG

0 – Fringe Player (

So, first I calculated a player’s Minimum Success Rate by dividing the number of non-busts by the total number of players in the range, then multiplied by 100. Then, I averaged all the point values to get a Quality Index, which I used to get the percent chance that a player will end up as a starter or All-Star.

One problem I ran into was that some players didn’t have enough comparable players to get a valid success rate. In those cases, I expanded the range until I got a large enough group of comparable players.

With the nitty-gritty mathematical process out of the way, I ran the success rates for around 100 draft prospects, which should cover almost every college player who will be picked. One other note, I adjusted the rates to account for draft position, since a first rounder would have a better chance than a second rounder. So without further delay, here are the players in the 2006 Draft Class with the best chance to be starting at the end of their rookie contract.

1. Ronnie Brewer, SG, Arkansas

% Chance to Start – 61.40%

Was similar to: Joe Johnson, Caron Butler, Michael Finley

This draft isn’t as strong at the top as it has been in the last few years. But if any player is going to develop into an All-Star, it will most likely be Brewer. He has almost every factor going in his favor. He’s very athletic with an NBA body, so he can physically handle the league. On the court, he can pretty much do everything with the only question mark being the funky release on his shot. It probably cannot be corrected because it stems from a childhood accident, but it does go in with some regularity. From an intangibles perspective, there should be no questions as he’s had no off-the-court problems. Also, he’s been around the game his whole life, since his father, Ron Brewer was an eight year vet.

2. Rudy Gay, SF, Connecticut

% Chance to Start – 56.71%

Was similar to: Jared Jeffries, DerMarr Johnson, Ron Artest

Gay’s ceiling may not be as high scouts would like to believe. He has a lot of skills, but his defense seems to be ahead of his offense at this point. He is similar to Brewer in that he is versatile with a wide range of skills. However, Brewer’s success rate is higher because he holds a significant advantage in the areas of ball-handling and decision-making. Scouts have questioned his assertiveness, but it’s probably a result of unreasonable expectations more than anything. His stats and behavior don’t indicate that he will be number one player. But, he does have great tools, so that will allow him to stick and be very effective in a complimentary role.

3. Shelden Williams, PF, Duke

% Chance to Start – 41.35%

Was similar to: Othella Harrington, Malik Rose, Alonzo Mourning

Shelden Williams is the safest pure big man in the draft. He’s an efficient low post scorer and excels on the defensive end. But he’s 22 and history has shown that players at this age don’t experience a lot of major development. So, he’s pretty much a finished product. Even so, he will most likely be pretty effective as a fifth wheel type role player.

4. Rajon Rondo, PG, Kentucky

% Chance to Start – 40.81%

Was similar to: Eric Snow, Jason Kidd, Dee Brown (Boston Celtics, not Illinois)

From a statistical perspective, Rondo is the best defensive point guard to enter the draft since Jason Kidd. His per minute rebound and steal rates are extraordinarily high for any point guard, much less a guy who’s only about six-two. From a visual standpoint, he possesses amazing quickness, both laterally and in straight-line speed. So this will allow him to cut off penetration and get to the basket, which will be huge key in the NBA nowadays with the new rules in effect. He does have a questionable jump shot, but he makes up for it by being a solid decision-maker and by taking good shots.

5. Shawne Williams, SF/PF, Memphis

% Chance to Start – 39.60%

Was similar to: Tim Thomas, Robert Horry, Mike Miller

Shawne Williams was most similar to Tim Thomas and that would be a fairly accurate assessment of his abilities on the court. Like Thomas, Williams can take players off the dribble, can post smaller defenders and shoot the three. Defensively, he’s more of a shot blocker than Thomas was at this stage. However, he does share some Thomas’ more negative qualities like spotty shot selection and some motivation issues. But, he will probably find a spot in the league because of his versatility.

6. LaMarcus Aldridge, PF, Texas

% Chance to Start – 37.63%

Was similar to: Lorenzen Wright, Samaki Walker, Rasheed Wallace

Aldridge is easily the most skilled offensive big man in this draft, but he grades out as a rather suspect defensive player. His defensive stats indicate that he is not nearly as active as he should be, considering the fact that he is very athletic and nearly seven feet tall. Then, from watching him play, he has a tendency to play soft. This could cause problems if he’s drafted by a team with a defensive minded coach.

7. Kyle Lowry, PG, Villanova

% Chance to Start – 34.88%

Was similar to: T.J. Ford, Steve Francis, Keyon Dooling

Lowry is another penetrating guard like Rondo, but has more question marks on offense and isn’t anywhere close on defense. Offensively, he doesn’t shoot the ball very well. It wouldn’t matter so much if he didn’t take a lot of questionable shots. In addition, his Assist Rate isn’t as high as it supposed to be for a point guard. Defensively, his stats are good enough, but he does have a tendency to commit cheap fouls. Most likely, he will end up as a solid back-up who could provide a team with an energy lift off the bench.

8. Brandon Roy, SG, Washington

% Chance to Start – 29.00

Was similar to: Jim Jackson, Paul Pierce, Antonio Daniels

Statistically, Roy didn’t grade out as high as I would’ve expected. Offensively, he checks out well by doing most of his damage as a slasher. He also has sound passing and decision-making skills, which will be an excellent bonus for the team that drafts him. On defense, he didn’t grade out as well. He might be more of a stay-at-home defender than a help guy because his steals and block rates weren’t really high. One concern on the defensive end would be that he is a little foul prone and with the new rules in place, it could be a bigger problem.

9. Marcus Williams, PG, Connecticut

% Chance to Start – 24.52%

Was similar to: Jacque Vaughn, Tyronn Lue, Steve Nash

Marcus Williams is first specialist to show up on the list. He’s a specialist because his only real skill is his ability is passing, everything else is a little bit spotty. On the positive side, his Assist Rate was the fourth highest among all players evaluated. On the negative side, his scoring ability will be a question mark as he isn’t a good athlete or very quick, so he will have problems getting into the line. This makes his shot selection an even greater question mark, since his eFG% is only about 45.5%. Defensively, he always had great shot blockers behind him, so his flaws were hidden. He probably won’t have that luxury in the pros, so his man defense will be problem since he is limited athletically.

10. Darius Washington, PG, Memphis

% Chance to Start – 23.38%

Was similar to: Gilbert Arenas, Chauncey Billups, Maurice Williams

This is the only major surprise on this list. Washington compared favorably to Gilbert Arenas even though he had a down year at Memphis this year. Like Arenas, his game is probably more suited to the NBA than to college. His one-on-one abilities will make him a threat on the offensive end because he can penetrate, dish and hit the outside shot. He’s held back a bit since he doesn’t seem to understand the game that well. Ideally, he should be drafted by team like Atlanta in the upper part of the second round. In a place like that, he would get playing time to develop his skills and be on a team that will be a patient with his mistakes.

11. Tyrus Thomas, PF, LSU

% Chance to Start – 23.00%

Was similar to: Drew Gooden, Stromile Swift, Antonio McDyess

Thomas is projected by most draft experts as a candidate for the top pick. However, his upside is not as high as the experts would think. He’s a phenomenal athlete with great skills on the defensive end. But, he doesn’t have much of an offensive game, being limited only dunks and put-backs. History has shown that post players are generally slow to develop their offensive game. So the odds are that Thomas will be similar to Stromile Swift being a fifth wheel or an energy guy off the bench.

NOTABLE OMISSIONS

Patrick O’Bryant, C, Bradley

% Chance to Start – 18.65%

Was similar to: Yinka Dare, Nazr Mohammed, Erick Dampier

O’Bryant grades out as similar to Tyrus Thomas, but not nearly as high because Thomas’ numbers are generally higher across the board. He has a lot of same problems as Thomas in that his offense is still under-developed, but he has added concern of being a bit soft and undisciplined. He is doesn’t go to the foul line as much and will shy away from contact at times. Also, he is very foul prone, which will limit his minutes in the NBA.

Adam Morrison, SF, Gonzaga

% Chance to Start – 17.51%

Was similar to: Casey Jacobsen, Calbert Cheaney, Pat Garrity

Morrison’s type has not done well historically, so it may be an explanation as to why his success rate is low. He grades out as strictly a catch-and-shoot scorer who does not look to pass or put the ball on the floor. This tendency may hurt him in the NBA, because he’s not very athletic and can’t create his own shot. Defensively, he has long way to go to say the least. His stats are poor with exception to rebounds. Then from watching him, he seems to really struggle to stay in front of his man. His success really depends on the team that drafts him and the system they play.

Rodney Carney, SF, Memphis

% Chance to Start – 14.40%

Was similar to: Tayshaun Prince, James Jones, Kyle Korver

Carney is an absolute enigma on the offensive end. He has a ton of athleticism, but doesn’t use it very much, since he spends most of his time jacking up three pointers. In fact, half of his field goal attempts over the course of his career were threes. He doesn’t look to pass, so this may be a bigger problem in the pros. His best chance to stick will probably be with his defense. He puts up solid stats and is athletic enough to stay in front of people, so that does work in his favor.

Randy Foye, SG, Villanova

% Chance to Start – 10.19%

Was similar to: Bob Sura, Derek Fisher, Jimmy King

Foye fits the most common type of player with the highest bust rate, which is the undersized two, not really a point guard position. That doesn’t bode too well for Foye, but he does have the tools to buck the odds. Also, he shown significant improvement over his four year career, but at 22, he might have topped out. So, he projects to be player off the bench in the mold of Fred Jones.

J.J. Redick, SG, Duke

% Chance to Start – 4.34 %

Was similar to: Trajan Langdon, Shawn Respert, Terry Dehere

The odds are really stacked against Redick to say the least. The problem with Redick is that he is as one-dimensional as it gets with his shooting being the only plus. He does not do anything else particularly well and on top of that, he is undersized and not athletic enough for the NBA. He might make it as a specialist, but every specialist in the past had some other plus skill in addition. Steve Kerr had point guard skills and Kyle Korver was a good rebounder in college. So, Redick might suffer a fate similar to Trajan Langdon, who was out of the league in three years.

I took a few things away from running this little study.

Versatility will greatly improve a player’s chances of success.

Guards have a higher chance to succeed if they work from inside-out.

College big men drafted outside the top 5 will not become elite players.

This method is not going to predict the future, but it could be useful way to assess the on-court risk associated with draft prospects. Then again, I could be wrong or I could be right. As it always is with the draft, time will tell.

If you have comments or want to know some other player’s success rate, please email me at rvl82@nbamarketreport.com

[Yeti]

Very interesting. Hard to tell how accurate the method is but the level of effort is very impressive. So can you go back 5-10 years and test it against the players being picked then?

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

I'd be pissed. BK drafted Marvin knowing he was a project, then BK better have the patience to see the project through. I get the feeling that Marvin is going to start coming out as a player if he gets enough time as a SF this coming season. If they play him at PF, then I think he'll be serviceable, but that's not what we spent a #2 overall pick for.

---

Other than your personal feelings for Marvin, if you can get equal talent at other positions and make the TEAM better by trading Marvin, why wouldn't you?

Your post did not even mention JS. Not once. JS has been 25% than MW no matter what year you campare and was a better pro prospect out of HS. It's one thing to like MW. It's another to like him over JS. Dead wrong!

W

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

PG JJ

SG Marvin

SF Morrison/Gay

PF Smoove

C Please anyone but Zaza

i wouldn't put it past him to start marvin at the 2.

---

Good lord you'll play everybody out of their ideal position! MW is a Sf, but if he leans anywhere else it d@mn sure isn't Sg.

It's not just about players or talent. It does matter where or in what position you play them no matter what nonsense BK tries and sells you on to justify a player's draft selection. "He's just a basketball player" only works to justify a player so long. Eventually they have to play a position or be 'tweener role players.

Let's all agree that playing 3 out of 5 players out of their ideal position is not ideal for the team shall we.

W

[exodus]

I never said I agreed with it. I just said BK might try it.

And as much as you dislike Marvin there is no question he is more of a 2 than Childress, who is too slow to play the position at either end.

I didn't like the JJ at pg nonsense from the beginning and I still don't but I don't think BK realizes that it didn't work.

Frankly I think the Hawks will continue to blow as long as BK is the GM.

[GST]

Quote:

---

Other than your personal feelings for Marvin, if you can get equal talent at other positions and make the TEAM better by trading Marvin, why wouldn't you?

---

I don't consider role players, one of whom wants to go back to Canada, to be equal to a #2 overall pick. Plus, Milwaukee's pick next year is most likely to be in the middle of the round. As far as personal feelings, I'm not the one who has an extreme emotional reaction every time Marvin is mentioned.

Quote:

---

Your post did not even mention JS. Not once. JS has been 25% than MW no matter what year you campare and was a better pro prospect out of HS. It's one thing to like MW. It's another to like him over JS. Dead wrong!

---

Actually, I do believe Marvin will be a better SF than Josh. I'm just not going preach it because it's just my opinion, history will bear out whether I am right or wrong. As far as Josh being 25% better than Marvin, the stats don't bear that out. Josh is better at blocking shots, Marvin has a better fg%. Overall, they have pretty similar stats right now.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

I never said I agreed with it. I just said BK might try it.

---

Are you saying anything here then as you have neither agreed nor disagreed with it. How safe and yet I feel like you are trying to say something through the safety of what BK would do.

Quote:

---

And as much as you dislike Marvin there is no question he is more of a 2 than Childress, who is too slow to play the position at either end.

Quote:

---

I simply don't know how to respond to this level of nonsense. Chhildress is not a 2-guard, but he resembles more of one than MW if only because he can guard the position better.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

As far as Josh being 25% better than Marvin, the stats don't bear that out. Josh is better at blocking shots, Marvin has a better fg%. Overall, they have pretty similar stats right now.

---

Per 48 minute TENDEX (all stat) rating

Josh Smith = 21.61 (2006)

Josh Smith 21.97 (2005)

Marvin Williams = 16.66

Thus, JS was 25% better than MW when comparing either JS's rookie stats when he was a year younger with less experience to MW's rookie stats or when comparing JS's stats to MW's stats at the same age and on the same team.

In short younger and with less experience or the same age and with the same team, JS produced 25% better.

Of course JS was also a higher draft prospect out of HS.

In shorter, MW has never been as good as JS and has consistently been only 75% as good as him.

The stats most definately bear it out.

W

[GST]

Well, Walter, we'll just have to see. If we pick Shelden, then Marvin and Josh are going to be competing for the SF position. Time will tell.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Well, Walter, we'll just have to see.

---

Those stats shocked you didn't they? MW is not nearly a more productive player, flat out. And your response is almost hushed. GST, I actually respect your response as it shows you are taking on this new information. Not willing to give up your position, but certainly reluctant to argue it in the face of these statistics.

Quote:

---

If we pick Shelden, then Marvin and Josh are going to be competing for the SF position. Time will tell.

---

All that competition at the Sf spot, holes everywhere but Sg on this team, and I should wait for time to tell me what? That we could have better built a TEAM by trading MW than by waiting for him do what that he has never come close to doing in comparison to JS? MW value is as a #2 pick. We lose that if we wait because he is too passive a player and not the superstar talent people want to believe.

W

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Are you saying anything here then as you have neither agreed nor disagreed with it. How safe and yet I feel like you are trying to say something through the safety of what BK would do.

---

Compared to some of BK's other moves playing Marvin at the 2 would be one of his more reasonable decisions.

Remember that he played Smith at the 2 last year. He insists JJ is a pg when we know he isn't. He is in complete denial about the Hawks need of a pg.

Childress is slow as molasses. He can't guard anyone and he can't beat guys off the dribble when they are actually up on him. He is the slowest wing player tested over the past 3 years. The Hawks give up over 3 ppg more when Childress is playing.

Marvin, however, is one of the faster wings out there. In fact he tested faster than Brewer and Roy. He can easily beat guys off the dribble going either way. he is also a good defender who can cut off players when they try to drive. The Hawks gave up 3 ppg fewer when he was playing.

Of course if it was my decision he would spend his whole career at the 3, JJ would play the 2, and the Hawks would be looking to add a center or a pg in the draft, not an undersized power forward.

[GST]

Walter, don't get your hopes up, I'm not becoming a little Walterite. I don't put much weight into someone else's processing of stats, so I really don't care about TENDEX. What I do know is that Marvin was taken #2 knowing that it would take time for him to develop, and I haven't seen evidence that he is a bust. Therefore, there is no reason to give up on him yet. So give it a rest, you're not changing my mind.

[AHF]

For reasons we have previously discussed, I also am not a huge TENDEX fan and believe it is now a completely outdated statistic.

That said, the statistical analysis from basketball reference concludes that Chris Bosh is the most similar player in NBA history to Marvin at the same age.

Here is the methodology:

Quote:

---

Below is a list of the thirteen categories I used for the similarity scores:

Height (Ht)

Minutes per game (Min/G)

Percentage of team field goals attempted while on the court (%Shots)

Percentage of team offensive possessions used while on the court (%Poss)

Effective field goal percentage (eFG%)

Free throw percentage (FT%)

Free throw attempts per field goal attempt (FTA/FGA)

Percentage of teammate field goals assisted (%Ast)

Turnovers per 100 possessions (%TO)

Steals per 100 opponent possessions (%Stl)

Blocked shots per 100 opponent two-point field goal attempts (%Blk)

Percentage of possible offensive rebounds (OR%)

Percentage of possible defensive rebounds (DR%)

I used a player pool that included all NBA seasons from 1978 to the present. Within each season, I found the standardized score (or z score) for each player in each category. League means and standard deviations were calculated in each season for each category using player minutes played as the weights. Although all players were used to determine the league means and standard deviations, similarity scores were only computed using players who played at least 25 percent of possible minutes played in the given season (in most seasons this will be roughly 1000 minutes played).

To obtain the similarity score between two seasons, I did the following:

Calculate the absolute difference in the z scores for each category.

The penalty for each category is equal to 10 times the absolute difference, with a maximum penalty of 50 points.

Find the sum of the penalties, using weights of 4 for Ht; 2 for Min/G, %Shots, and %Poss; 1.5 for eFG% and %Ast; and 1 for all other categories.

Subtract the sum above from 1000.

As an example, let me use LeBron James's 2006 season and Tracy McGrady's 2005 season. Below are their z scores in each of the 15 categories, the absolute differences in their z scores, and the penalties:

FTA/

Ht Min/G %Shots %Poss eFG% FT% FGA %Ast %TO %Stl %Blk OR% DR%

James 0.295 1.644 2.616 2.352 0.553 1.938 -0.018 0.726 -0.800 0.633 0.008 -0.777 0.469

McGrady 0.279 1.549 2.220 2.335 -0.185 1.419 0.195 0.049 -1.159 1.049 -0.145 -0.810 0.089

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Abs Diff 0.016 0.095 0.396 0.017 0.738 0.519 0.213 0.677 0.359 0.416 0.153 0.033 0.380

Penalty 0.160 0.950 3.960 0.170 7.380 5.190 2.130 6.770 3.590 4.160 1.530 0.330 3.800

The weighted sum of the penalties is 52.755. The similarity score for these two seasons is 1000 - 52.755 = 947.245 (this figure actually rounds up to 948 when all of the decimal places are carried). When all player seasons are analyzed, the closest match to James's 2006 season is in fact McGrady's 2005 season.

---

My point in that is that I won't give up Marvin without someone paying a premium for him.

[KB21]

[AHF]

Also, just for the record I am more impressed by what I have seen of Josh Smith and Chris Bosh than what I have seen of Marvin Williams so far. However, I would expect both of them to established stars in a trade and would not consider trading either for the top pick in this draft.

[Traceman]

than he was as a second year player? Based on per 48 minute TENDEX, he was slightly better as a rookie. From my perspective, I don't care what the stats say, I thought Smoove was SIGNIFICANTLY better as a 2nd year player. I say this because I think that you have to look at the big picture when you look at stats and stats don't come close to telling the whole story.

From my perspective, I thought Marvin looked more skilled than Smoove as a rookie but less effective. I think a lot of that had to do with the opportunity that Smoove got to start once Toine was traded. Marvin looked a LOT better toward the end of the season when he got a few starts and his confidence started to go up. If he had started the last half of the season as Smoove did as a rookie, I think Marvin's production would have compared very favorably to Smoove's production. Just my opinion based on my own observations.

[Guest Walter]

...as many young players are.

However, in the 2nd half of the season (after break), JS' per48 TENDEX was 24.97 and MW's was 18.10. In otherwords, JS finished considerably stronger last season as well, during what should have been MW's larger learning curve.

No stats don't tell it all and alot of indistiguishable factors like increased aggressiveness, his more PT and ops, better team play go into the appearance of a player producing more than perhaps they were, but simply, MW's wasn't nearly as good as younger, less experienced Josh, Josh on the same team and the same age, and couldn't improve enough as the season progressed.

Does that tell the whole story? Of course not. Nothing does. But by the time the "whole story" is told the value of one player will likely be diminished and we will have wasted time experimenting rather than building a legit team.

W

[Lascar78]

per 48 tendex means nothing

[Packfill]

Quote:

---

Shelden Williams and Wayne Simien are totally different players. Shelden is taller, longer, stronger, more athletic, and plays defense. Simien is an undersized offensive player without much athleticism.

While Shelden may not quite have the star potential you want out of a number 5 pick, he's definitely worthy of a top 10 pick and he's just what we need, so it wouldn't be a mistake to take him at 5.

---

I am curious as to why some people do not think Sheldon has enough "potential" to be a #5 pick when this franchise recently used a #6 pick on Josh Childress, who has less "potential" then Sheldon. Sheldon is faster then Childress, despite weighting 60+ pounds more then Childress.

Don't get me wrong, I like Childress and his game but the reality is he is a complementary player - the type of guy every team needs. Sheldon may never be a 20 point scorer, but he may be a double figure rebounding guy who plays good interior defense, which any franchise could use, especially this one.

I am definitely not sold on Sheldon as the pick, but for people to say he does not belong in the conversation as far as consideration for the #5 pick is illogical.

[Johnnybravo4]

I think that Shelden Williams and Ryan Gomes are the similar. There was a whole lot of talk about Gomes being undersized although he dominated in college for years. Although I wouldn't expect Williams to plummet like Gomes did, if we didn't pick him the idiot GM's would let him fall to mid first round.