Kevin Pelton's SCHOENE Statistical Comparisons for 2014 Top Prospects

[Elizah Huge]

Kevin Pelton uses a SCHOENE system using college stats, measurements, and age to compare prospects to past and present players. The order is using Chad Ford's Big Board. These are the eight guys who could be in play for the Jazz:

1. Andrew Wiggins, Kansas

Tobias Harris (98.0), Luol Deng (97.8), Maurice Harkless (97.7), Quincy Miller (97.2)

There's more star power, including Carmelo Anthony, lower in Wiggins' top 10 comps. However, Wiggins being similar to so many players is in itself an indication he's not a unique prospect. Paul George, the most popular subjective comparison for Wiggins, was slightly too old to qualify for Wiggins' list after his sophomore season but had a score of just 90.0 anyway, in large part because of his superior steal rate.

2. Jabari Parker, Duke

Carmelo Anthony (96.7), Luol Deng (95.7), Michael Beasley (95.0), Kevin Durant (95.0)

Ammo here for the Parker-Anthony comparisons. The nine players most similar to Parker were all lottery picks, including four that went either first or second.

3. Dante Exum, Australia

Kyrie Irving (92.3), Jrue Holiday (88.9), Javaris Crittenton (86.3), Bradley Beal (83.9)

Exum's youth limits the size of his similarity pool, but his best scores -- based on his translated performance in the FIBA U-19 World Championship last summer -- are point guards, which is notable for those wondering where he will end up.

4. Joel Embiid, Kansas

Patrick O'Bryant (96.1), Sean Williams (95.7), Daniel Orton (93.7), Robin Lopez (93.2)

Few low-post scorers of Embiid's ability have entered the league in the period covered by my database. Layne Vashro's similarity model that looks at a longer span comes up with Patrick Ewing and Hakeem Olajuwon among Embiid's comps.

5. Noah Vonleh, Indiana

Chris Bosh (97.7), Derrick Favors (97.5), Spencer Hawes (95.0), Kosta Koufos (93.8)

When I saw Vonleh play in person, I immediately thought of Bosh, so it was encouraging to see the similarity model come to the same conclusion. Favors is another one-and-done post player with more potential than he demonstrated in college.

6. Marcus Smart, Oklahoma State

Tyreke Evans (88.3), James Harden (87.5), Chris Paul (87.0), John Wall (86.0)

Smart is one of two first-round prospects without a match better than 90. Players with some similarity to him have been successful in the league; Evans and Dion Waiters have had the worst careers of the group.

7. Aaron Gordon, Arizona

Anthony Randolph (94.7), Thaddeus Young (94.7), Maurice Harkless (94.6), Michael Kidd-Gilchrist (93.9)

While they share the ability to push the ball upcourt and find teammates as power forwards, there's little comparison between Blake Griffin's two seasons at Oklahoma and Gordon's season at Arizona. Griffin's similarity to Gordon rates at just 67.8.

8. Julius Randle, Kentucky

Al-Farouq Aminu (96.3), Spencer Hawes (96.2), J.J. Hickson (96.0), Brandon Bass (95.3)

Removing age, Randle's second-best comparison is an interesting one: David Lee (97.6). Alas, Zach Randolph predates my database.

Some interesting comparisons for players later on in the draft:

16. Tyler Ennis, Syracuse

Chris Paul (95.1), Rajon Rondo (93.8), Russell Westbrook (92.6), T.J. Ford (92.4)

As I explained in my discussion of Ennis with Chad Ford, point guards with high assist and steal rates and low turnover rates excel in the NBA. Whether Ennis really belongs in that group depends on how much stock you place in a steal rate compiled at the top of Syracuse's 2-3 zone.

19. Jusuf Nurkic, KK Mega Vizura

Eddy Curry (96.5), Enes Kanter (95.2), Derrick Favors (93.9), Spencer Hawes (93.0)

A capable scorer with a low block rate for a center, Nurkic compares favorably to Curry and Kanter during their rookie seasons in the NBA. Both went top-five.

29. Jordan Adams, UCLA

Dion Waiters (96.6), Kentavious Caldwell-Pope (95.6), Otto Porter (88.8), Paul George (88.7)

All of the 10 players most similar to Adams were drafted in the top 15, which is another indication he could be a steal late in the first round.

I know some of you have been posting a player or two in other threads, but here is a thread for all of the prospects that could be in play for the Jazz up at the top of the draft. By no means do these comparisons mean a player will be good or not, never the less they are very interesting.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

These are interesting and kind of frightening for me with my Gordon love.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

Also scares me with Wiggins... His production doesn't match his hype.

 

[Qman]

Also scares me with Wiggins... His production doesn't match his hype.

Not a surprise to anyone who watched Wiggins play this year. You have to decide if you think Kansas used Wiggins as he will be used in the NBA. I think Kansas held him way back.

 

[Stifle Tower]

So Favors compares to Vonleh and Nurkic.
Not sure I put much stock in this weird system.

 

[Coach Ellis]

It's advanced metrics. This is the basis of the analytical movement. Run the numbers and analyze everything. It's how you interpret the numbers that really matter. In that area, I have full faith that DL will sort it all out in the end. While he's definitely an analytics guy, he's also an old-fashioned tried-and-true scout. He worked his way up in this business by developing his player evaluation skills. He lets his eyes help him make his decisions. That's a good thing IMO. All too often, I think people get so worked up about the numbers that they forget to actually watch the players, you know, play basketball. Things like this can help. They play a part in the process, but they are not the end-all, be-all. Ultimately, I still firmly believe that film study and medicals is always the #1 and #2 factors that are used to evaluate players.

The only problem with a system like this is that it doesn't factor in the variables. Like the kind of roster a guy plays on, or what kind of system they ran, or if their role changed due to injuries, or if he personally suffered injuries of some sort, or if their coaches suck. There's so many different variables that are in play that you can't truly evaluate. With Aaron Gordon, we know that his shooting and shifting roles are going to effect something that is as statistically valued as this.

 

[Elizah Huge]

Kevin Pelton uses a SCHOENE system using college stats, measurements, and age to compare prospects to past and present players.

So Favors compares to Vonleh and Nurkic.
Not sure I put much stock in this weird system.

Derrick Favors was 6'10.25 and 245 lbs coming out of Georgia Tech and he averaged 27.5 minutes a game.

12.4 PPG, 8.4 RPG, 2.1 BPG, 1 SPG, 0.9 APG, 61% from the field on 8.1 shots a game.

Noah Vonleh was 6'9.5 and 247 lbs coming out of Indiana and he averaged 26.5 minutes a game.

11.3 PPG, 9.0 RPG, 1.4 BPG, 1.0 SPG, 0.6 APG, 53% from the field on 7.2 shots a game.

Both have a 7'4 wingspan, Favors obviously a better defender (almost one more block a game), Vonleh obviously a better scorer (48.5% from 3).

Both will be drafted as an 18 year old and both were/will be selected based a lot on their potential.

Yeah, don't really see the comparison at all.