Strategy Session: Ranking Draft Prospects by Tiers

[sinctybldh]

This is from Chad Ford's ESPN Insider Article. Not blog.

Every time I put up a new mock draft (look for our newest one on Tuesday), I get a lot of feedback from readers who wonder how I put it together and how it differs from the Top 100.

This is how it works: Both pieces are reported pieces. In other words, I talk with NBA scouts and executives to get a sense of:

There's a lot for scouts to like about Greg Oden's game.

A. Which teams like which players (mock draft).

B. What the consensus is among all 30 NBA teams about who the best players in the draft are (Top 100).

I use the word consensus lightly. Often, even NBA GMs and scouts employed by the same team can't agree on their internal rankings of players.

"I fight with my scouts constantly," one prominent GM told me. "Everyone has their own ideas, their own preferences, their own methodology. There really is no consensus and, I hate to say it, I'm not sure there's even any real right or wrong."

Obviously both lists are imperfect because the draft is a bit of an inexact science. NBA teams do more than just watch prospects play games. They work out players, give them psychological tests, do background checks and conduct personal interviews. All of this factors into the process and could change opinions.

Factor in the ranking wars with another age-old debate -- do you draft for need or for the best player available -- and it's no surprise that the draft can be so volatile. Many teams take into account holes at certain positions (i.e. the team has no small forward) or coaching/system preferences (i.e. the Suns draft players who can fit into Mike D'Antoni's up-tempo shoot-first-ask-questions-later system) when making their decisions.

To make sense of disparate rankings and debates over team needs, several teams who have been very successful in the draft employ what I call a "Tier System" of ranking players. Instead of getting an exact order from one to 60 of the best players in the draft, they group players, based on overall talent level, into tiers. Then, the team ranks the players inside each tier based on team need.

This system allows teams to draft not only the best player available, but also the player who best fits a team's individual needs.

So what do the tiers look like this year? After talking to several NBA GMs and scouts who employ this system for their teams, I've put together these tiers. (Because the teams do not want to divulge their draft rankings publicly, the teams have been left anonymous.)

TIER 1

Greg Oden

Kevin Durant

Note: There seems to be a clear preference for Oden among GMs, but everyone agrees both players have superstar potential and are clearly the consensus top two in the draft.

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

TIER 2

Corey Brewer

Mike Conley

Jeff Green

Al Horford

Yi Jianlian

Brandan Wright

Note: One team expanded this tier to include all of Tier 3, essentially making Tier 2 the third through 12th picks, but most everyone else made a cut right before the players in Tier 3. I'd also note that there was near consensus that Horford is the third-best player in the draft.

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

TIER 3

Spencer Hawes

Joakim Noah

Al Thornton

Julian Wright

Note: Tier 3 represents the final four players in the top 12. Every team I spoke with had the same 12 players in the top 12. That's a pretty amazing consensus for this deep in the draft. It also shows the depth of the draft itself. Last year, Tiers 1, 2 and 3 consisted of a total of seven players.

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

TIER 4

Javaris Crittenton

Acie Law

Rodney Stuckey

Nick Young

Thaddeus Young

Note: There was a clear preference for the Youngs in Tier 4, with one team saying its Tier 3 was expanded to include both players. Not everyone had Crittenton or Stuckey in Tier 4; some had them in Tier 5.

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

TIER 5

Morris Almond

DeVon Hardin

Josh McRoberts

Jason Smith

Tiago Splitter

Sean Williams

Note: The consensus really starts to break up here. Some have Smith and Williams ranked higher. Some have McRoberts and Hardin ranked lower.

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

TIER 6

Arron Afflalo

Marco Belinelli

Derrick Byars

Daequan Cook

Glen Davis

Jared Dudley

Nick Fazekas

Rudy Fernandez

Marc Gasol

Taurean Green

Petteri Koponen

Marcus Williams

Note: If you do the math, 35 players are on the list. Why 35 guys for 30 slots? I included in Tier 6 every player that a team told me was in its top 30. I suspect had I polled every team, this number would have expanded to around 40 players.

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

So how does the tier system work?

A team ranks individual players inside each tier according to team need. So, in Tier 2, if point guard is the biggest need, Mike Conley is ranked No. 1 in Tier 2. If power forward is the biggest need, Al Horford or Brandan Wright is ranked No. 1 depending on individual team preference. (See table for an example.)

Here's an example:

TEAM B

Needs: PG, SG, PF

Tier 2

1. Mike Conley

2. Corey Brewer

3. Al Horford

4. Brandan Wright

5. Yi Jianlian

6. Jeff Green

TEAM A

Needs: PF, SF, PG

Tier 2

1. Al Horford

2. Brandan Wright

3. Yi Jianlian

4. Corey Brewer

5. Jeff Green

6. Mike Conley

The rules are then pretty simple. You always draft the highest-ranked player within a given tier. So, for example, if the Bulls are drafting No. 9 (Tier 3 territory) and Corey Brewer is on the board (a Tier 2 player), they take him regardless of position. The rule is that you never take a player from a lower tier if one from a higher tier is available. So if the Bulls had Spencer Hawes ranked No. 1 in Tier 3, they'd still take Brewer, even though center is a more pressing need.

BULLS

Team needs: PF, C, SF

Tier 2

5. Corey Brewer

6. Jeff Green

Tier 3

1. Spencer Hawes

2. Joakim Noah

3. Julian Wright

4. Al Thornton

Here's another example (see table):

What this system does is protect teams from overreaching based on a team need. The Bulls won't pass on a clearly superior player like Brewer to fill a need with Hawes. However, the system also protects a team from passing on a player who fits a need just because he may be ranked one or two spots lower overall.

Let me give you an example from the worst-drafting team over the last few years, the Atlanta Hawks.

Hawks GM Billy Knight has stated that he takes the best player on the board, regardless of team need. He's proven that the last few years by taking Marvin Williams ahead of Chris Paul and Deron Williams in 2005, and taking Shelden Williams ahead of a point guard such as Rajon Rondo in 2006.

A source formerly with Atlanta's front office told me that the Hawks had Marvin Williams ranked No. 1, Andrew Bogut ranked No. 2, Deron Williams ranked No. 3 and Paul ranked No. 4 in 2005. So on draft night, Knight took Marvin Williams with the No. 2 pick after the Bucks selected Bogut No. 1 overall.

In a tier system, however, the source conceded that all four players, in his mind at least, would have been Tier 1 players -- in other words, the Hawks thought all four had equal long-term impact potential. If the Hawks had employed a tier system, they would have ranked inside the tier based on team need and fit, rather than just ranking the prospects from one to 30.

In that case, the Hawks likely would have ranked either Bogut (they needed a center) or Deron Williams (they still need a point guard) No. 1. Marvin Williams actually would have been ranked No. 4 under that scenario.

In any case, like every draft system, the tier system isn't perfect. But the teams that run it have found success with it. It has allowed them to get help through the draft without overreaching. Compared to traditional top-30 lists or mock drafts, it seems like a much more precise tool of gauging which players a team should draft.

Chad Ford covers the NBA for ESPN Insider.

[gsuteke]

and half of this board want to fill our most glaring need out of the 4th tier, although at #3 we wouldn't be addressing our 2nd biggest need either.

*scratching head*

[jerrywest]

Quote:

---

and half of this board want to fill our most glaring need out of the 4th tier, although at #3 we wouldn't be addressing our 2nd biggest need either.

*scratching head*

---

I guess, God decided that Conley is tier 2 and Law/Critt are tier 4. Right?

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

and half of this board want to fill our most glaring need out of the 4th tier, although at #3 we wouldn't be addressing our 2nd biggest need either.

*scratching head*

---

I guess, God decided that Conley is tier 2 and Law/Critt are tier 4. Right?

---

be reasonable.

[jerrywest]

The tier system works when you must be objective because you have a huge number of employees to judge. In these cases economy of scales is too much to judge every single instance individually.

For a small group, you have to be subjective. Tier system is useless here.

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

The tier system works when you must be objective because you have a huge number of employees to judge. In these cases economy of scales is too much to judge every single instance individually.

For a small group, you have to be subjective. Tier system is useless here.

---

and on a subsequent note a player's performance on one team doesn't necessarily translate to another.

[jerrywest]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The tier system works when you must be objective because you have a huge number of employees to judge. In these cases economy of scales is too much to judge every single instance individually.

For a small group, you have to be subjective. Tier system is useless here.

---

and on a subsequent note a player's performance on one team doesn't necessarily translate to another.

---

Partially true, but it still is a highly endorsed predictor with a great track history.

[gsuteke]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The tier system works when you must be objective because you have a huge number of employees to judge. In these cases economy of scales is too much to judge every single instance individually.

For a small group, you have to be subjective. Tier system is useless here.

---

and on a subsequent note a player's performance on one team doesn't necessarily translate to another.

---

Partially true, but it still is a highly endorsed predictor with a great track history.

---

that's my philosophy. it's why I'm not all boo hoo about the Hawks not drafting Roy. I don't see how he would duplicate those stats here unless we moved some other players.

[TheDude]

worst drafting team? i think that's a bit of a stretch there chaddy boy.

[Admin]

which strategy. Do the better drafting teams use the tier system and the poorer drafting teams use a sequential system? Man that would be some useful information to have.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

and half of this board want to fill our most glaring need out of the 4th tier, although at #3 we wouldn't be addressing our 2nd biggest need either.

*scratching head*

---

And that's just it gsuteke. What IS our most glaring need? PG or C? While we defnitely need a floor general, we also need a consistent ( key word - consistent ) presence in the middle on both the offensive and defensive end.

A lot of outsiders and some Hawks fans think that if we get a great PG, that everything will be OK. Really? So that's going to stop guys like these from putting up big numbers against us?

11/17 Udonis Haslem - 21 points . . 17 rebounds

12/8 Kwame Brown - 13 points . . 7 rebounds . . 7 assists

12/12 Marcus Camby - 8 points . . 17 rebounds . . 4 blocks

12/20 Mehmet Okur - 30 points . . 10 rebounds

12/23 Nazr Mohammad - 19 points . . 10 rebounds ( in 23 minutes )

1/27 Sam Dalembert - 19 points . . 10 rebounds . . 7 blocks

* * * Stephen Hunter - 15 points ( 7 - 9 FG )

2/5 Andrew Bynum - 14 points . . 10 rebounds

2/28 Tyson Chandler - 18 points . . 13 rebounds . . 4 blocks

3/14 Al Jefferson - 23 points . . 9 rebounds

3/23 LaMarcus Aldridge - 27 points . . 14 rebounds

* * * Jamal Magloire - 9 points . . 16 rebounds

THESE are the type of numbers that irritate me most about the Hawks. It isn't the lack of production from the PG position. Because frankly, when Lue is healthy, he can at least provide a consistent scoring punch from that position to keep people honest. I agree that we need a young PG here, especially with guys like Lue and AJ on their last year, and Speedy being the ultimate health risk. But if those guys are healthy, that position isn't our most pressing need.

But the centers? Who knows which ZaZa will show up. Lorenzen was the best "on the ball" defender, but stat wise, he gave us absolutely NOTHING. The guy couldn't even rebound or score.

I mean, look at what those guys did to us. None of those are all-star caliber players. But those guys absolutely killed us by scoring or rebounding way over their seasonal averages.

That's why the Hawks lose games people. It's because we can't stop any damn body. We've shot 55% FG in games, and STILL have lost.

At least if we got consistent production from the 5 spot, we could weather those types of games and see if JJ can pull it out at the end. Gasol is an average defender at best, but at least he can put offensive pressure on frontline players to possibly get them in foul trouble. And he's good for around 20 a night. Not the 8 points . . 6 rebound . . 3 turnover games that ZaZa puts up. Or the 3 points . . 2 rebounds . . 19 foul games that Lorenzen puts up. ( LOL @ 19 fouls . . that what it seems like )

But what the hell is a PG or JJ going to do when you got guys like Udonis Haslem playing like Karl Malone against us, or a guy like LaMarcus Aldridge looking like Hakeem Olajuwon when going up against the Hawks? A good PG prospect isn't going to stop the "swinging fence" we have in the interior.

So I look at this draft like this. With not much difference between Conley and Law, ( because they're 2 differnt kinds of PGs that can both be effective on the NBA level ), we have to try to maximize the value of both the #3 and #11. Grabbing Conley at #3, and the BPA at #11, may not address the issue on the inside. If the BPA isn't a C or a PF, do we still take the BPA or do we take the next best big man? In that scenario, if Shelden doesn't help close off the inside, we're screwed AGAIN, and have to hope that our perimeter players and Smoove play at a high level every night.

If you take Horford at #3 and Law at #11, we at least have the chance to address both areas in a span of 2 hours. Law has the ability to score in bunches, plus run the team. Horford has the ability to put both offensive and defensive pressure on the frontline of teams. If we keep the picks, that's the way we have to go.

Those higher tier players above Law, like Hawes and Noah, are going to be gone by the time we pick at #11. If they weren't, then I wouldn't be against taking Conley at #3, and taking a chance at one of those guys at #11.

But if Ford is right, and Law isn't in ANYBODY's top 12, then he's going to be available at #11. Which means that we can get that frontline player who has the ability to play the 5, while getting a good PG prospect to possibly run the team in the future.

Hopefully, BK's draft board looks like this.

1) Horford

2) Conley

3) Yi

4) Brewer

5) Wright

6) Noah

7) Law

If that's the case, we can get his top pick and his #7 guy on the board, and address both the PG and C spot with adequate talent. It's either that . . or take his #2 guy, and risk taking a guy not in his top 10, to try to address the need on the frontline as well.

[gsuteke]

I think he's a great PF prospect.

Look I hope people aren't getting this Conley thing from me twisted, I want to see BK address a problem.

I think Conley is a prototype PG. he addresses a need. pick him.

if you draft a PF and play him out of position and pick up a PG later that may not be of superstar caliber then you haven't accomplished anything. you are spinning your wheels.

If Horford can play Center pick him at #3. I still say he'll be standing around like the rest of our players in the end though waiting for a TLue shot to clang off the rim to get some junk shots off inside.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Quote:

---

I think he's a great PF prospect.

Look I hope people aren't getting this Conley thing from me twisted, I want to see BK address a problem.

I think Conley is a prototype PG. he addresses a need. pick him.

if you draft a PF and play him out of position and pick up a PG later that may not be of superstar caliber then you haven't accomplished anything. you are spinning your wheels.

If Horford can play Center pick him at #3. I still say he'll be standing around like the rest of our players in the end though waiting for a TLue shot to clang off the rim to get some junk shots off inside.

---

Not if Law is running the point.

And at least Horford will battle for the ball, instead of watching it hit the rim and come almost to the floor to react, like ZaZa does. The first Hawks games I saw with ZaZa on the floor, was the Memphis game in November 2005. We lost that game because Gasol outhustled both ZaZa and Harrington for the ball, and tipped the shot in to beat us.

Remember teke, we don't have a pick next year. We basically have to address both of these areas right now. And if we have to take Horford and Law to do it, then we have to take that chance.

I'm not anti-Conley. I just think that Law will be just as good if not better than Conley. 2 years from now, people are going to regret passing on Law, just like they'll regret passing on Corey Brewer.

[gsuteke]

that's why if you don't address either need in theory for the next 10 years in this draft then you have failed miserably.

there are no Centers available, that's why I'm all over Conley at 3. if you don't get a franchise PG this year you are screwed, period. by the time our young players are up for extensions this team will be blown up and we'll be looking at another 5 years of no playoffs.

as of today this team could make the playoffs in the East with a legit PG and could contend in the East in the next 3 by developing players already on the roster. that's with a legitimate PG.

if Law is a comparable player to Conley then of course you wait until 11 and pick him.

hell at this point I wouldn't be against drafting Conley at 3 and Law at 11. we could beat the Heat 135 to 96 next year and put Shaq out for the season with a heart condition.

for the love of god, just address a need!

[Packfill]

I agree.

Another thing to question is what are the Hawks doing with Sheldon if they draft Horford? Sheldon won't see the light of day he will be buried so far down the bench. Same with Jones.

There is no question the Hawks need a physical post presence on offense and defense and a point guard.

I am of the opinion that a pass first point guard will be the best fit with the Hawks because of the inability of the Hawks forwards to create their own shots. The Hawks need someone who can penetrate and dish.

[gsuteke]

[KB21]

It's a major stretch. Since 2002, there hasn't been very many GMS that have drafted worse players than Jerry West, but By God, you won't see a talking head like Chad Ford criticize the great Jerry West at all.

[Packfill]

If BK ever does something more than put together 30 win teams he might get some respect to. Until that happens he will just go down as the GM with the worst overall record in history.

[BusBoyIsBack]

Quote:

---

I agree.

Another thing to question is what are the Hawks doing with Sheldon if they draft Horford? Sheldon won't see the light of day he will be buried so far down the bench. Same with Jones.

There is no question the Hawks need a physical post presence on offense and defense and a point guard.

I am of the opinion that a pass first point guard will be the best fit with the Hawks because of the inability of the Hawks forwards to create their own shots. The Hawks need someone who can penetrate and dish.

---

Having Shelden should not affect our decision at the 3rd pick. Why don't people realize this?

Who cares where we picked, Shelden, the fact of the matter is we struck gold and now have two draft picks in a deep draft class.

Instead of worrying about where people were drafted, we take this opportunity to fill the two gaping holes at PG and C.

Shelden just like Childress although a high draft pick, can be solid depth on the bench. So can Solomon.

Honestly I would get rid of Pachulia.

[KB21]

That's exactly what I've been trying to stress to everyone on here.

Everyone wants to point to the Hawks ranking either second to last or dead last in a lot of offensive stats as the reason they lose games.

While I see the need for offensive improvement, people are fooling themselves if they think the Hawks are going to take that next step to get into the playoffs without focusing on defense. This is why I am against all these trade offers for players like Pau Gasol, Zach Randolph, Jose Calderon, Sergio Rodriguez, or whoever else has been bandied about. These guys play close to no defense, so you are trading off offensive production for defensive production. Do any of you really think this team will improve by going from the bottom third to the middle third on offense yet dropping from the middle third to the bottom third on defense?

The Hawks MUST have defense in mind when they make these moves. If the Hawks want to win, then they have to keep people from shooting 46% from the field against them and scoring 98 points per game against them.

The offense will eventually take care of itself. Defense is where the bread needs to be buttered though!!