(Finally) It's time for the results of my system rankings of all the players (of significance) in the 2009 NBA draft. In Post #2 I will begin analyzing some of the players. Before I get to the list, I want to briefly explain again what the system is and what it's for. (Note: Please forgive any grammar or spelling errors. This is a looong post so I'm sure I messed up somewhere)
I have been obsessed with basketball statistics ever since the Kings came to Sacramento. I was even an assistant coach and statistician for my school for two years. About six years ago in 2003, there was such a fuss as to who would be the better pro between LeBron James, Darko Milicic, Carmelo Anthony, Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade. To find out I decided to create a statistical system for the sole purpose of comparing current college basketball player's statistics to the college stats of current and former NBA players to see if I could project the NBA potential of current college (and European) players. I went back and ended up taking about a year to come up first with the system then to input all the best NBA player's college stats into the system. To my dismay I couldn't find a way to rank players like LeBron that never went to college. To rank the players, I decided to use a number scoring system from 0 to 105. (Note: Below is a brief description of what each number equates to towards a players assessed NBA potential.)
Besides the (most important) common stats such as points, rebounds, assists and FG%, the system factors in assist/turnover ratio, strength of schedule, height relative to position, athleticism and class. Basically, strength of schedule is self explanatory. For example, if two players have exactly the same stats (per 40 minutes) but one player plays for UCLA and the other for Sacramento State, guess which one has the higher potential? The Sac State player. Go Hornets!! Erm, sorry. What is interesting about the system is that some schools I have found, like Syracuse, will give the player a negative modifier because of the systems they run. Same with Duke, North Carolina and others. Some, like UCLA, Connecticut and Memphis, give a positive modifier. Height and position go together. Obviously a 6'4" point guard is fine but a 5'9" one usually has significant disadvantages. The athleticism modifier is the hardest one to gauge and is the only modifier in the system where my personal opinion comes in to play. I don't give a player a bonus for being extra athletic but he probably will get a negative modifier for being overtly non-athletic or extremely overweight. In this year's draft, Nick Calathes, Luke Harangody (who's pulled out now) and John Bryant have received this modifier. (Note: I want to emphasize that even though I may prefer certain players to others, all the scores are based solely on the player's stats and by comparing them to every other NBA player before them. I don't change or tamper with a score because of personal preferences for or against a player. In fact, there are times where I disagree with my system's findings! Like with Jason Thompson last year and Spencer Hawes before him. Oops!)
Lastly I definitely factor in class. A senior and a freshman with the exact same stats, height and level of competition are (usually) never equal. The freshman will get the bonus for his potential. Almost every player improves from his freshman to senior year. Not all, but most do and usually significantly, so yes I factor in class.
Of course there are things that I just can't factor in such as work ethic, being prone to injury, toughness, hustle, leadership, one-on-one defensive ability (besides steals and blocks), basketball IQ and good or bad personalities. That stuff I leave up to all the analysts, GMs, scouts and fans. I can't actually meet or watch any of these guys play on a regular basis so it's impossible to accurately factor these things in.
Score descriptions: Before the list, here is a description of what each player score represents based on their college stats:
100+: Superstar/MVP potential - The best players of all time. These are the franchise players that will be the ones you hear in the MVP talk at the end of the year. Shaq (105), Dr. J. (104), Olajuwon (103.5), Michael Jordan (102.5), Allen Iverson (102.5), Charles Barkley (100.5) and Chris Paul (100) are among the players to score in this group.
98-100: All-Star/Superstar potential - Players in this rank will usually become multiple all-stars and sometimes even superstars. Kevin Durant (99), Scottie Pippen (99), Chris Webber (99) and Clyde Drexler (99) are among the players to score in this group.
96-98: All-Star potential - Players in this rank will usually become multiple all-stars but rarely all-star starters. Paul Pierce (97.5), Elton Brand (97.5), Carlos Boozer (97) Brandon Roy (96.5) and Mitch Richmond (96) are among the players to score in this group.
93-96: Solid Starter/All-Star potential - A player in this rank should be a solid starter for his whole career and will usually make at least one appearance as an all-star at some point in his career. Rasheed Wallace (96), Carmelo Anthony (96), Mike Bibby (95.5), Al Horford (95.5), Rajon Rondo (93.5) and Gerald Wallace (93) are among the players to score in this group.
90-93: Solid Starter potential - The backbone of the NBA. These players usually won't make it to an all-star game but they should have solid NBA careers. Danny Granger (92.5), Ben Gordon (92), Lionel Simmons (91.5), Kevin Martin (91), Rodney Stuckey (91), Spencer Hawes (91) and Paul Millsap (90) are among the players to score in this group.
86-90: Fringe Starter/Solid Starter potential - The elite of the NBA bench players. These players will usually be the first players off the bench for good teams or solid starters on poorer teams without a star at the position they play. Troy Murphy (90), Marcus Camby (89.5), Jason Thompson (89), Ike Diogu (88.5), Marc Gasol (88.5), John Salmons (87.5), Leon Powe (87) and Francisco Garcia (86.5) are among the players to score in this group.
82-86: 6th Man/Fringe Starter potential - The lunch pail types of the NBA. These players are the backups to the starters and will usually start about 25% of the time in their career. They are usually good players with limitations or average players that excel in a specific area. They may be starters on a poor team (such as Corey Brewer, 84.5), on a team that needs that player's special skill (such as Earl Watson, 84.5) or because they are filling in for an injured starter. Carl Landry (84.5), Renaldo Balkman (84), Brandon Bass (83) and Channing Frye (82.5) are among the players to score in this group.
77-82: Career Reserve/6th Man potential - These are the energy guys of the NBA. These players almost never become solid starters in the NBA. About half scoring in this rank will be out of the league in 3 years while the other half will be able to find a team to stick with and have a long career bringing some needed energy off the bench. Bobby Jackson (81.5), Kenny Thomas (81.5), Trevor Ariza (81), Daniel Gibson (79.5) and Eddie House (79.5) are among the players to score in this group.
72-77: Career Reserve potential - These are the specialists of the NBA. About only 5% of players from this rank go on to start more than 10% of NBA games they play in and over half never even make it to sign a contract. Most of the players who score in this rank that go on to have long careers in the NBA are specialists - players that excel in a key area that a team might look for to fill holes or to use in certain situations such as a 3-pt marksman (JJ Redick, 73.5 and Steve Novak, 72), a shot blocker (Brian Skinner, 75.5), a banger/toughman (Eduardo Najera, 75.5) or a defensive specialist such as Randy Brown (74). Lawrence Funderburke (76.5), Justin Williams (76.5), Dahntay Jones (73.5) and Mikki Moore (72) are among the players to score in this group.
67-72: 12th Man/Career Reserve potential - The bench warmers and injured reserve of the NBA. Over 90% of players ranked in this group never sign an NBA contract. Similar to the rank above, the only players that make a long NBA career are specialists or the hustle/scrappers. Mateen Cleaves (71), Maurice Evans (69.5), Ronnie Price (68.5) and Patrick Ewing Jr. (67) are among the players to score in this group.
62-67: Fringe Player/12th Man potential - Only a handful of college players that find themselves in this rank have ever played a handful of games in the NBA. Duane Causwell (64), Daniel Ewing (64.5), Ryan Hollins (64.5) and Jermareo Davidson (63.5) are among the very few in this rank that have made it onto an NBA court.
0-62: Should Go Undrafted - A player in this range should not be drafted. Any GM that does draft someone in this rank should be punished.
2009 NBA Draft Rankings
| Player-Class | School | Pos. | Score |
1) | Oklahoma | FC | 103 | |
2) | Spain | PG | 100 | |
3) | Memphis | G | 99 | |
4) | North Carolina | PG | 98 | |
5) | Arizona State | SG | 94.5 | |
6) | Davidson | G | 93.5 | |
7) | UCLA | G | 93 | |
8) | Connecticut | C | 92.5 | |
9) | Pittsburgh | FC | 92 | |
10) | Wake Forest | PG | 91.5 | |
11) | Syracuse | PG | 90.5 | |
12) | Wake Forest | F | 90.5 | |
13) | Florida | GF | 90.5 | |
14) | Italy | PG | 90 | |
15) | Louisville | GF | 89.5 | |
16) | Missouri | PF | 89.5 | |
17) | USC | GF | 89 | |
18) | Ohio State | C | 88 | |
19) | Arizona | PF | 87.5 | |
20) | Gonzaga | F | 87.5 | |
21) | Connecticut | PG | 87.5 | |
22) | UCLA | PG | 87 | |
23) | Missouri | FC | 86.5 | |
24) | USC | PF | 86.5 | |
25) | Arizona | SF | 86 | |
26) | VCU | PG | 86 | |
27) | Brigham Young | GF | 86 | |
28) | North Carolina | PF | 85.5 | |
29) | France | G | 85.5 | |
30) | North Carolina | GF | 85 | |
31) | France | PG | 85 | |
32) | Marquette | G | 84.5 | |
33) | Duke | G | 84.5 | |
34) | Louisville | F | 84.5 | |
35) | Israel | F | 84 | |
36) | Kentucky | SG | 84 | |
37) | Virginia Military | G | 84 | |
38) | Santa Clara | C | 84 | |
39) | North Carolina | G | 83.5 | |
40) | Pittsburgh | GF | 83 | |
41) | Spain | PG | 83 | |
42) | Duquesne | PG | 83 | |
43) | Arizona State | PG | 82.5 | |
44) | Tenn-Martin | PF | 82.5 | |
45) | Central Florida | G | 82 | |
46) | North Dakota St. | SG | 81.5 | |
47) | Saint Mary's | PG | 81 | |
48) | LSU | G | 81 | |
49) | Oklahoma State | PG | 81 | |
50) | Boston College | PG | 81 | |
51) | Xavier | F | 81 | |
52) | NC State | SF | 81 | |
53) | Texas A&M | C | 81 | |
54) | Marquette | PG | 80.5 | |
55) | Florida State | G | 80.5 | |
56) | Temple | GF | 80 | |
57) | Miami (FL) | G | 80 | |
58) | DePaul | SG | 80 | |
59) | Gonzaga | PG | 80 | |
60) | Syracuse | GF | 80 | |
61) | Memphis | GF | 79.5 | |
62) | Memphis | F | 79 | |
63) | Washington | PF | 78.5 | |
64) | Pittsburgh | PG | 78 | |
65) | Cleveland State | G | 78 | |
66) | Virginia Military | G | 77.5 | |
67) | Massachusetts | PG | 77.5 | |
68) | Spain | C | 77.5 | |
69) | Utah | C | 77 | |
70) | Georgia Tech | PF | 77 | |
71) | South Carolina | PG | 76.5 | |
72) | Marquette | SG | 76.5 | |
73) | Baylor | PG | 76.5 | |
74) | Memphis | FC | 76.5 | |
75) | Saint Joseph's | PF | 76 |
| Player-Class | School | Pos. | Score |
76) | UCLA | SG | 76 | |
77) | Ukraine | C | 76 | |
78) | Washington | PG | 75 | |
79) | Massachusetts | PF | 75 | |
80) | Turkey | SF | 75 | |
81) | Michigan St. | FC | 74.5 | |
82) | Virginia Tech | GF | 74.5 | |
83) | Russia | G | 74.5 | |
84) | Villanova | PF | 73 | |
85) | Clemson | GF | 72.5 | |
86) | San Diego State | GF | 72 | |
87) | Spain | F | 72 | |
88) | Gonzaga | FC | 71.5 | |
89) | LSU | GF | 71.5 | |
90) | USC | PG | 70 | |
91) | Spain | FC | 70 | |
92) | Providence | C | 69.5 | |
93) | Chattanooga | GF | 69 | |
94) | North Dakota St. | F | 69 | |
95) | Chattanooga | F | 68.5 | |
96) | Italy | F | 68.5 | |
97) | Nebraska | SG | 68 | |
98) | Cornell | C | 66 | |
99) | Turkey | C | 66 | |
100) | Rhode Island | G | 65 | |
101) | Georgetown | SF | 65 | |
102) | Connecticut | PF | 64.5 | |
103) | UTEP | SG | 64.5 | |
104) | UCLA | PF | 64.5 | |
105) | UNLV | PG | 64.5 | |
106) | Arkansas | PG | 64 | |
107) | Xavier | SF | 63.5 | |
108) | Wyoming | PG | 63 | |
109) | Oklahoma | SF | 62.5 | |
110) | Syracuse | PG | 62 | |
111) | Saint Mary's | PF | 61.5 | |
112) | East Tenn. St. | SG | 61.5 | |
113) | Fordham | SF | 60.5 | |
114) | Xavier | GF | 60.5 | |
115) | Rhode Island | PF | 60 | |
116) | Ohio | SF | 60 | |
117) | Alabama | F | 59.5 | |
118) | Cal St. Northridge | PF | 59.5 | |
119) | Dartmouth | GF | 59.5 | |
120) | Notre Dame | PG | 59.5 | |
121) | Western Kentucky | PG | 58.5 | |
122) | UAB | G | 57 | |
123) | New Mexico | G | 56.5 | |
124) | Missouri | SG | 56 | |
125) | Duke | PG | 55.5 | |
126) | Oklahoma | PG | 55 | |
127) | Georgia Tech | G | 53.5 | |
128) | Texas | PG | 53 | |
129) | Wyoming | F | 53 | |
130) | San Diego State | GF | 52.5 | |
131) | Florida Int. | C | 52.5 | |
132) | GWU | F | 51 | |
133) | Charlotte | F | 47.5 | |
134) | Texas | FC | 45.5 | |
135) | North Carolina | G | 43.5 | |
136) | Cal St. Fullerton | PG | 43 | |
137) | Stephen Austin | FC | 41.5 | |
138) | Arizona | F | 41 | |
139) | GWU | GF | 40.5 | |
140) | Charlotte | F | 37 | |
141) | Cleveland State | SF | 36 | |
142) | North Carolina | G | 34 | |
143) | Davidson | FC | 34 | |
144) | Nebraska | G | 33.5 | |
145) | Morgan State | G | 20.5 |
(Please click HERE for the 2008 rankings)
There are 36 Comments. Load Now.
Shortcuts to mastering the comment thread. Use wisely.
C - Next Comment
X - Mark as Read
R - Reply
Z - Mark Read & Next
Shift + C - Previous
Shift + A - Mark All Read
Comment Settings
Live comment alert: Hide it!
Comments for this post are closed.