Based on Hollinger’s Draft Rater, let’s take a look at who the best and worst picks would be for the 2009 NBA draft.

The “Worst Pick”: DeMar DeRozan (#9 pick in NBA draft)
DeMar DeRozan is a classic example of NBA “talent evaluators” becoming infatuated with a player’s physical attributes and apparent athleticism. DeRozan has been compared to Vince Carter because he appears to be freakishly athletic.  Scouts and fans repeatedly turn to DeRozan’s incredible athletic ability when anyone mentions his poor production on the basketball court.

If DeRozan was not the correct pick, then what could Toronto have done differently?  Let’s take a look at two other shooting guard prospects that were drafted much later than DeRozan, Chase Budinger (pick 44) and Danny Green (pick 46). Let’s compare their college stats with DeRozan’s:

To be effective in the NBA, guards must be able to distribute the ball, shoot from three, and hit their free throws. As you can see, DeRozan is not proficient in any of these categories. Hollinger projected DeRozan as the 54th best prospect in the draft, much different than his actual draft position, 9th overall. The Draft Rater ranked Green as the winner from the group, as supposedly the 8th best pick, but Budinger was also still well ahead of DeRozan at 31st.

If DeRozan is not an effective basketball player as of now, then his athletic ability must be what separates him from the competition. Fortunately, the pre-draft combine measures a player’s physical and athletic attributes and we can objectively compare the group.

We can see that both Danny Green and Chase Budinger held their own against DeRozan in measurements and vertical jump, while both exceeded him in speed and agility. It is true that DeRozan has incredible leaping ability, but his lack of horizontal quickness means he will have trouble guarding quicker guards. These results beg the question, if DeRozan isn’t as skilled as Green or Budinger and not noticeably more athletic, then were Toronto’s scouts mistaken when assessing DeRozan’s upside?  Perhaps DeRozan will be the first player to go against Hollinger’s Draft Rater, and somehow become more productive in the NBA, against great competition, than he was in college, against amateur competition.

The “Best Pick”: DeJuan Blair (#37 pick in NBA draft)
The San Antonio Spurs entered the draft without a first round pick, but still ended up making the best pick of the night. DeJuan Blair is the opposite of DeMar DeRozan: he is short for his position, has knee concerns, carried too much weight in college, and had elite stats.

First let’s see how Blair measures up to some other power forwards in the draft:

It is true that Blair is shorter than the other players, but his long arms give him a higher standing reach than lottery picks Blake Griffin and Tyler Hansbrough. One attribute that is often overlooked is his incredible mass. Certainly one can imagine Taj Gibson (CHI-Pick 26) struggling to hold his ground in the post, similar to how 2nd overall pick Hasheem Thabeet did in this video:

Let’s take a look at how that group faired statistically over the last college season.

Adjusted for pace of play, DeJuan Blair had the highest rebound rate of the group. In particular, his offensive rebound rate was more than two times higher than most other prospects in the draft. He had the second highest PER projection of the group behind Blake Griffin. What’s more, his field goal percentage suggests that he may be more than a rebounding hustle player. How did he fair against good competition you ask? When he played against Hasheem Thabeet (pick 2), he accumulated 22 points and 23 rebounds while Thabeet fouled out with just 5 points and 4 rebounds.

Time will ultimately judge whether Toronto’s decision to select DeMar DeRozan 9th overall will pay off, and whether the first 36 picks of the draft will enjoy more success than DeJuan Blair.  But something tells me that the Spurs got it right, and the Raptors did not.

Related posts:

1. Is Oden A Bust?
2. Not So PERfect

At a glance, his rookie statistics are less than stellar.  Oden averaged only 8.9 points, 7.0 rebounds, and 1.1 blocks.  Of the 61 games he played this season, he averaged 3.9 fouls per game and accumulated 5 or more fouls 21 times.  Not bad, considering Oden only played 21:30 minutes per game.  If he were to play 40 minute per game with the same foul rate, he would accumulate an astonishing 7.2 fouls per game.

So, is Oden a bust? Or did he actually have a better season than traditional statistics indicate? In our article about Kobe Bryant, we praised John Hollinger’s player efficiency statistic called PER.  For those that did not read our last article here is a quick recap on how PER works:

“PER strives to measure a player’s per-minute performance, while adjusting for pace. A league-average PER is always 15.00, which permits comparisons of player performance across seasons. PER takes into account positive accomplishments, such as field goals, free throws, 3-pointers, assists, rebounds, blocks and steals, and negative ones, such as missed shots, turnovers and personal fouls. The formula adds positive stats and subtracts negative ones through a statistical point value system. The rating for each player is then adjusted to a per-minute basis so that, for example, substitutes can be compared with starters in playing time debates. It is also adjusted for the team’s pace. In the end, one number sums up the players’ statistical accomplishments for that season.”

Oden Compared To His Rookie Class
Greg Oden’s rookie season PER was 18.13, ranking him second among all rookies.  Kevin Love had the best rookie PER with 18.34.  O.J. Mayo and Derrick Rose finished the season with a 14.23 and 16.05 PER, respectively.  The numbers indicate Greg Oden was more efficient than Derrick Rose and O.J. Mayo on a per minute basis.  However, Mayo and Rose averaged more than 35 minutes per game, roughly 14 more minutes than Oden played, and subsequently had more opportunities to help their teams.  Unfortunately for Oden, the most he could have played before fouling out with his rookie foul rate would be roughly 33 minutes per game.

Oden Compared To NBA Busts
Now lets compare Oden to NBA busts: Kwame Brown and Michael Olowokandi.  Kwame Brown’s PER as a rookie was 11.2 and his career high PER was 15.7.  Similarly, Olowokandi’s PER as a rookie was 11.8 and maxed out at a dismal 12.4.  Hollinger’s PER rating shows that Brown and Olowokandi never had a single season with the same efficiency that Greg Oden had as a rookie.

The Curse of Sam Bowie
Many Blazer’s fans believe that Greg Oden is another Sam Bowie.  The Blazers selected Bowie as their number one overall pick in 1984, passing up on Michael Jordan.  Let’s compare Greg Oden’s rookie year PER to the best year Sam Bowie had in the NBA:  Bowie played for 10 seasons in the NBA with a career PER average of 14.6 - Bowie’s career high in PER was 16.4.

A List of Great Post Players
Here is a list of dominant post players and their rookie season PER statistics:

Let’s not forget that Greg Oden is coming off of major knee surgery.  According to his blog, he recently started squatting again after a two year layoff. Oden may foul at an incredible rate and “look” terrible while trying figure out the NBA game, but the numbers say he is light years from being a bust. In time he will likely develop into the dominant force we all thought he could be.

Check out his rookie mix tape:

Related posts:

1. Not So PERfect
2. The 2009 NBA Draft
3. The NBA…Where Fudging Happens

Just as was true for baseball until a short time ago, it has always been difficult to accurately measure a basketball player’s true performance on the court.  In baseball, a man named Bill James revolutionized the way fans looked at a player’s true effectiveness through sabermetrics.  And now, a man named John Hollinger has done the same thing for basketball, forever changing how fans will view the game’s traditional statistics.  Combining these traditional statistics, which you see in every box score, with underlying statistics that aren’t as highly publicized, Hollinger discovered his groundbreaking statistic, which he dubbed “PER” -  Player Efficiency Rating. This is how Hollinger described his new system:

“PER strives to measure a player’s per-minute performance, while adjusting for pace.  A league-average PER is always 15.00, which permits comparisons of player performance across seasons.  PER takes into account positive accomplishments, such as field goals, free throws, 3-pointers, assists, rebounds, blocks and steals, and negative ones, such as missed shots, turnovers and personal fouls. The formula adds positive stats and subtracts negative ones through a statistical point value system. The rating for each player is then adjusted to a per-minute basis so that, for example, substitutes can be compared with starters in playing time debates. It is also adjusted for the team’s pace. In the end, one number sums up the players’ statistical accomplishments for that season.”

With that in mind, let’s take a look at Kobe’s PER.  This season, he posted a PER of 24.46, ranking him 6th in the NBA.  Lebron James posted the highest PER with a 31.76, followed by Dwyane Wade at 30.46, and Chris Paul rounding out the top three at 30.04. I know what you’re thinking: Kobe is older now and Phil Jackson rested him a bit more than in previous seasons.  So maybe we should look at the highest PER Kobe has posted in a single season, right?  Kobe’s highest PER in a single season was 28.11 in the 2005-2006 season.  At this point, it’s not a stretch to say that Dwyane Wade, Lebron James, and Chris Paul all three had better seasons this year (according to statistics) than Kobe Bryant is likely to ever have in his career… including that season with the 81 point game.  In fact, Lebron has already surpassed Kobe’s career high PER of 28.11 in three of his five seasons, and Chris Paul has posted the highest PER ever for a point guard in his first four years – a ranking that pushes him past even the beloved Magic Johnson.

One argument in Kobe’s favor is that he does have three championships, and is about to collect a fourth.  While this may ruffle the feathers of many Laker/Kobe fans, the most logical conclusion is that Kobe Bryant has simply gotten lucky.  In only three out of his thirteen years in the NBA has Kobe Bryant not had a teammate with an elite PER.  One of his most famous teammates, Shaquille O’Neal, has the 2nd highest career PER in NBA history, only behind Michael Jordan.  And his new teammate, Pau Gasol, is ranked 28th overall in NBA history with a career PER of 21.77, just behind all-time greats Dr. J and Moses Malone.  In those three seasons in which he didn’t have a teammate with an elite PER, Kobe posted a record of 121-125, a win percentage of .491. It seems that, if he doesn’t have another player with a high PER on his team, Kobe just doesn’t have what it takes to get to a championship.

Kobe Bryant’s ability to do the unimaginable leaves us star-struck.  Eighty-one points in a single game, 62 points against the Dallas Mavericks through 3 quarters,  61 points at Madison Square Garden breaking Michael Jordan’s previous record, 35.4 points per game scoring average in the 2005-2006 season… the list goes on and on.  When Kobe delivers a fadeaway jumper over three defenders, it’s all you can do to keep from drooling on the person’s head in front of you while your mouth hangs open in sheer awe.  But it’s exactly these types of feats which cloud our judgment when trying to view Kobe objectively as a player throughout the course of his career. And it’s these emotions that lead many to declare that Kobe’s the best. However, here is a list, just of current NBA players, who have a higher career PER than Kobe:

• Shaquille O’Neal
• Lebron James
• Dwyane Wade
• Chris Paul
• Tim Duncan
• Dirk Nowitzki
• Kevin Garnett

While Kobe Bryant is undoubtedly one of the greatest players who will ever play the game of basketball, raw numbers will never lie, and they indicate that he may not be as PERfect as everyone thinks.

Related posts:

1. Is Oden A Bust?
2. The 2009 NBA Draft
3. Mauer Power?