It All Starts With A Philosophy
What are you really looking for in the NBA draft?
I’ve been an observer of the NBA draft for just over 20 years. As it says in my profile, I’m a Laker fan. I watched the Lakers pick amazingly well in the 80s and 90s, only to have a series of misses in the early 00s.
Not that I have any input on the team whatsoever, but I wanted to get an understanding of how the draft works and pretend how to help the team through the draft.
It took several years to build a philosophy, I do have one built. Admittedly, it is constantly changing, just like different people/players in the draft and the type of talent they show best, as well as changes in what success means at the NBA level.
The subtitle asks, “What are you really looking for?”
This is my ramble.
You’re looking for an NBA level player first and foremost. You’re not looking at positions, who is a fit, who makes sense within the organization, etc. You’re looking for NBA level skill sets. You need, at bare minimum, 1-NBA-level skill set for a player to make the league.
So, what does this mean? This can be interpreted in multiple ways. One can ask, “Which player is a star player?” One can also ask, “Who will have the longest NBA career?” After all, star players tend to be the healthiest players that have the skillset, size, and athletic abilities to last in the league anyway. If, a person were to make a big board based on “Who is most likely to be a star player” and ranked them in order of #1-#70, separated them by skills, size, athletic attributes, and intangible qualities, that person would have an actual big board based on best players available, in order.
Doesn’t that make sense? Lots of NBA teams don’t take on that kind of philosophy. Let other teams get focused on their own philosophies and make mistakes. The bottom line is, the draft is a free shot at adding talent. The worst case scenario is adding depth at the same position. That’s an amazing worst case scenario.
Problems with Fit First Approach
One problem with drafting for fit is, it assumes that the positional fit player is in the same tier of talent as the remaining best player available. That isn’t always true. Some teams are fortunate and the assumed best player available lands in a position that a team lacks depth in, or is empty as a position overall.
Another problem with drafting for fit is, it assumes that the best players on the team are worth building around. Are they really? A championship squad has at least one Top-5 or Top-10 NBA talent, along with another Top-10 to Top 25 talent, and a set of highly skilled role players. Ideally, two Top-5 talents get teams real far, especially in a salary cap league. There are so few championship teams that have won with less than that, and those teams don’t tend to repeat championship years.
So, if you’re a team, drafting for fit, and the top players aren’t deemed the franchise types to build around, then what happens if they get traded? Drafting for fit goes out the window. Now, you’re hoping a player has enough talent and work ethic to see it through, but sometimes that isn’t always the case.
Deviation
How bad does it look to draft Sam Bowie “because you need a center” and already have Clyde Drexler? The 1980’s were a different time, to which I ask, “How many championships would the Portland Trailblazers have with Michael Jordan and Clyde Drexler? Sam Bowie was hurt, and maybe had a chance of being a multiple All-Star player, but Bowie and Jordan are not in the same tier talent-wise. Olajuwon, on the other hand, definitely has a case. People forget how the Houston Rockets would beat the Chicago Bulls during the regular season in the mid-90s at least. In any case, Portland was in a position to change the landscape of the league with two dominant wing players.
It’s hard enough getting one franchise player. Is it so bad having two franchise players that play the same position? Is the difference between small forward and shooting guard so wide that it’s detrimental to have two All-Stars at the same position?
I answer, it’s not. If there are two small All-Star point guards of that outlier talent level, trade one for a better team fit if it doesn’t work on the court. Maybe one of them adapts better to the situation. This is a far better outcome than drafting for a positional fit, and not having that player pan out. Was it really so bad when Denver had two developing young centers in Jokic and Nurkic? Was it really so bad when the Lakers had Nick Van Exel, Eddie Jones, and Kobe Bryant in the backcourt? It may have taken awhile, and while some of those players got traded, Denver is now making deep runs in the playoffs with Jokic. The Lakers, found their two Top-5 NBA talents, and have won 6 championships since.
In some cases, you can change the league’s philosophy on winning. The Golden State Warriors had a shooter in Curry. Their idea of BPA (Best Player Available) was drafting Klay Thompson. But, who knew they would revolutionize the league, play a ton off-ball, have Iguodala and Draymond run the offense, and be among the league’s best offenses of all time and winning championships in the process?
No one. This leads to…
…Best Player Available:
Flash to 1996. The Lakers let go of George Lynch and Anthony Peeler. They traded Vlade Divac for a 13th pick. That’s a lot of salary shedding for a big risk. But the world is different when you know what you’re looking for.
Jerry West understood this, and was hoping he would land Shaquille O’Neal through free agency that summer, but he didn’t stop there.
See, he watched the best player workout he had ever seen during the pre-draft process. Did it matter that in 1997 both Nick Van Exel and Eddie Jones were both All-Star players? No. Both players were part of an up-and-coming mid-90s Laker team with quickness, athleticism, shake, and up-tempo play.
He still drafted Kobe Bryant.
Now, I can argue that Kobe Bryant wasn’t ready for the league. I can argue that he should have gotten more playing time early on to sort through his mistakes faster as a young player. But in the end, what happened? Nick Van Exel wasn’t the guy to build around at that time. Eddie Jones was once seen as that guy, but Kobe Bryant was really THAT guy. I was hurt to see Eddie be traded away, really. But what was the worst case scenario? Kobe would show flashes of that All-NBA talent at a young age. He started in consecutive games as an underweight small forward and averaged 19 and 10. By the time he was 21, he was a championship level player.
Just to be clear, the Lakers “needed” a tough defensive power forward, preferably with shooting range. Or, they “needed” an elite shooting small forward to buy Shaq more room. Well, as it turns out, they really needed a second franchise player to build around.
All. Teams. Need. Franchise. Players.
Period.
They ended up trading for that elite shooting small forward in Glen Rice, and of course, after his championship year, they were able to address that power forward need with Horace Grant. They finished a four-year championship run with three championships.
Let’s take a more recent example. The Golden State Warriors, in a championship window when healthy, “needed” a rebounding big that could finish and protect the rim.
With the second pick in the 2020 NBA draft, the Golden State Warriors selected, James Wiseman from the University of Memphis.
Unfortunately, he couldn’t provide the big-man skills the team sorely needed from the jump. That’s not his fault. He’s a young player. But, at what cost? LaMelo Ball, who looks like a franchise changer, was picked third. Now, there’s no way that the Warriors could have predicted Klay Thompson getting hurt again, but this leans into my “drafting the best player available, at worst case, adds depth” argument. The Warriors couldn’t rebound well with Wiseman on or off the floor, and in this case, there’s the possibility of LaMelo Ball being able to be traded for what the Warriors needed in the paint. Personally, the idea of LaMelo Ball as an initiator while Stephen Curry plays off ball, is intriguing. It’s possible that it would have been a positive enough duo to skip the play-in games and make the playoffs outright. After all, is the idea of playing LaMelo at 1, Steph at 2, and Klay at 3 in small ball lineups, really that bad?
I don’t think so.
But the point remains. Talent supersedes all, and until a team gets their two or three franchise players, everyone else is rebuilding, period.
So, what determines the Best Player Available?
There are a ton of variables in this equation. I shall attempt to simplify it as much as possible. Let’s start with the basics.
Skill Set - What does the player do best? Shoot? Dribble? Pass? Rebound? Defend? A combination of all of the above? To what level of refinement?
Ah, refinement. This is going to be a longer post than I had initially thought.
Let’s begin with…
Shooting.
Generally, people understand shooting as a player shooting from any given range with the ball going through the hoop. Let’s stretch that definition with some things to look for.
Are they catch and shoot shooters? Does the player excel standing at a spot, pre-shot-prepped, hands available, quickly going into the form and motion of generating energy from the base and releasing that energy at the release point, consistently?
How is the shot prep? Are the feet lined up to the hoop prior to the catch? Did they use a screen optimally to give themselves the best look? How quick is the release? Is the gather a deterrent from a consistent shot form? Can defenders distract the shot? Are they hop shooters? Or 1-2 shooters?
Rhythm
Are they rhythm shooters? Are they more comfortable with pull up jumpers, understanding the spacing their defender has made, before pulling up? What kind of rhythm shooters are they? Are they better at making shots going left like Sedale Threatt or Lou Williams? Are they more step-back types like Luka Doncic or James Harden? Do they have counters that make them less predictable to get open second and third looks off the dribble?
Usage
Here’s an additional element. Do they need the ball in their hands to be efficient shooters? Some players need to get their touches and require higher usage (25%+, see Basketball Reference) to get a better feel for the basketball and rhythm for the game. Other players can come in absolutely cold, jump right into a lineup, go to their money spots, and start making shots before they have even warmed up. Lately, a player that resembles that is Ben McLemore during the regular season.
Shot Selection
Does the player take good shots? Maybe that’s the kind of question for someone that is more technically versed in basketball, but even newer fans can recognize bad shots. Were the shots too early on the clock? Was the shot form distorted and the player still took them? Was the player impatient and should have gone through a top offensive player on the team first before searching for a look? Does the player settle on shots that the defense gives them?
Shooting is a complicated art. It takes tons of focus, repetition of mechanics, and should require an understanding of how each player is an energy conduit. The energy starts at the feet and ends at the release point. Hiccups in the middle distort shot accuracy. But since I’ve at least touched on the subject, let’s go to a subject that’s every bit as difficult.
Ball-Handling
Where do I start? Ideally, you want all five players on a team to be able to dribble. Initiators need to master this skill. Low usage finishers, don’t really, but they still need to be experts at what they do best. Me? I like focusing on initiators. They can run an offense from any position on the floor.
Humbly speaking, I think ball-handling is the most important skill. The ability to get anywhere you want on the floor, not lose a possession, and essentially attack a defense is a killer in scrimmage games, hoop gyms across the world, all the way to the NBA level. Let’s take a quick look at how I look at how players attack.
Speed Dribble
Before I even think about how a player attacks the basket within a half-court, I think about how a player can initiate a transition opportunity. Great passers with vision can throw touchdown passes down court to beat a defense. Other guys don't have that level of skill, so they can beat defenses off the dribble, starting with that defensive rebound.
The current league is so skilled, that guys like Draymond Green, Nikola Jokic, and Anthony Davis can initiate fast breaks with the speed dribble. Want to add a few percentage points of transition opportunities? It would really help when transition opportunities can start outside of the primary initiator, especially with the top defensive rebounders.
Straight Line Attacks
By far, this is the most basic attack off the dribble. Does the offensive player see a gap prior to the catch? Can the player attack a gap in the defense and take full advantage of that all the way to the cup? Surprisingly, not all players can. You can see the confidence in a player when they begin with the dribble and the first step in sync, and continue to accelerate all the way to the hoop.
Players with more advanced ball-handling can still be biased to driving a specific direction, but can at least be equally effective going left or right. One of my pet peeves with straight-line drives is when a player uses a protective dribble. Guys like Julius Randle and Lamar Odom have no problem accelerating to the hoop going left, but not going right. They’ll use their bodies as a shield, slow down, and in some cases, stop half-way for a short range jump-shot instead of an off-handed finish at the cup.
Worse yet, some elite wing players only have two dribbles in them before they’re at the cup. They’re so quick, fast, strong, and on that upper echelon of athleticism that they’ve only needed two dribbles, basically from the 3-point line to finish at the rim. These are guys to watch out for, because they are easier to read defensively on-ball. Some, can straight-line drive right-handed while shifting speeds, while others only have two-dribbles with their left hand.
One change of direction before I get my cup of tea, please.
This sums up a how few bigs attack, but almost all wings. Players will use the crossover to attack the top foot, and then opt to sprint to the hoop with a straight line drive. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, but it really just depends on the player. Some guys really have burst (see De’Aaron Fox and Dennis Schroeder). Some guys have tons of strength and rely on this move, along with initiating contact with defenders (Kawhi Leonard, LeBron James, Nikola Jokic). Either way, they’re beating a defender to a spot with quickness, speed, strength, footwork, or any combination of those abilities, while establishing their real estate on their way to the cup.
But the best can change directions multiple times on the same drive.
It’s common to see this out of great primary initiators. Some are too fast to utilize a second change of direction, while other players like Chris Paul, prime Deron Williams, Luka Doncic, and others will run a pick and roll, get the switch defensively to a big, and simultaneously change direction on the new defender, and basically be uncontested at the rim. There’s just no time for the defense to react and recover. I find this to be THE definitive skill I look for in primary initiators with heavier usage. Even guys like Rajon Rondo, who don’t have the shooting gravity, can execute this and still find the way to the cup. Essentially, if a player can do this, they have all skills to improvise in all ways that defenses can strategize against a ball handler. The rest is left to the shooting ability.
But What About Footwork?
Footwork is absolutely essential to becoming a more complete offensive player. I think it’s one of the skillsets that players can learn as their NBA careers move forward. The ball handling aspect, on the other hand, is far more difficult and requires outlier effort and skill to advance. Guys like Stephen Curry and Paul George have made themselves masters of it, while guys like Devean George and Kyle Kuzma, haven’t. Otherwise, you’d want Derek Fisher to handle the ball like Allen Iverson, wouldn’t you?
Footwork, comes with time. Carmelo Anthony, Kobe Bryant, Tracy McGrady, Luka Doncic, James Harden, and countless others, have refined their footwork and learned the ability to get whatever shot they want. But, I’m absolutely okay if young players don’t have this in their backpocket. They’ve been so successful with what they’ve been doing just to become a draftable prospect, why would they deviate?
Technical footwork has been more advanced with the modern NBA as well. Step backs, change in speeds, euro-steps, and the half-pivot mid-drive (or the Smitty) are all crucial elements in creating an open shot from midrange or getting to the basket altogether, and that’s just facing the hoop. Utilizing footwork is a different tool for changing direction,, but chances are, the players that can change direction with ball handling multiple times, also have the coordination and body control to incorporate advanced footwork, seamlessly.
What else is there?
Passing ability. This is a difficult subject to cover. This too, is a complicated skill. Passing ability comes with awareness. Is a player aware of how to pass and create an advantage for the recipient? Passing to stationary players is one thing. But, can you pass to a player in a stationary position, right to the hands? How about, right to the hands, and away from the defense? Optimally, a player can receive a pass and go straight into triple threat position or shooting position off the catch.
Now, how about passing with players on the move? Is there player aware of his teammate on the move? Is he or she also aware of the defense reacting, or not reacting, to the teammate in motion? Passing ahead is a quarterback-like skill, but often gives teams the easiest abilities to score.
Let’s add another dimension to that. Can the player pass to other teammates while being on the move? This is where things get fun. Imagine breaking down pick and roll coverage and hitting the roll-man with a well placed lob pass. This is absolutely about a player that is so refined with their ball handling that it’s second nature, so familiar with the defensive coverage and their opponent that they’re confident to make moves, so well-hearsed in the execution, that they’re focused on making that lob pass, in full assumption that is the best decision to make according to the defensive coverage.
That particular action can still be more refined. The best playmakers find ways to nail the timing by passing one handed off the dribble. Guys like Luka Doncic, Trae Young, and LaMelo Ball come to mind here. Even guys like Nickeil Alexander-Walker do it predominantly left-handed, and it throws defenders off. Usually, good players do it with their dominant hand, but the best are able to throw strikes to their targets, with either hand, off the dribble, and in motion. If the passes aren’t right into the shooter’s pocket, the advantage gained by shifting the defense is usually lost.
Awareness is crucial for all of this. It’s not just about one’s skill level going up against a defender and what they’re capable of, but it’s also being aware of the nine other players on the floor, and all of their skills, tendencies, position on that floor in that given snapshot in time, and making the correct decision, at the correct time. This allows them to read their teammates and their individual defenders, and squeeze through tighter passing windows that the defense may have their back to. Only the best passers pull this off. Trae Young does this, regularly.
Great passers usually have among the easiest translatable skills because of this. After all, basketball is about position, awareness, and decision-making above all things.
The Best Players Have At Least, A Combination Of All Three.
Triple Threat Players. The idea of deploying each of those skills as weapons has its own basketball stance in terminology. Catch the ball in triple threat position and leave the defender guessing.
If a player really is that skilled, he or she has a counter to a comfortable shot within their skill set, for any space the defender gives up. This is what makes a player deemed, “unstoppable.” There are maybe ten guys in the league that have this ability to various levels of refinement. They can’t be stopped. They can only be contained. For the most part, they’re going to get the shots, passes, and positions on the floor that they want. They’re just that skilled.
Then There’s The Other End Of The Floor.
Defense. Defense is so complex as a skill. NBA players are so evolved in terms of offensive skill, that it’s nearly impossible to stop players one-on-one. There are physical tools to defense; wingspan, lateral agility, and verticality. More importantly, is how those physical tools are used.
Team defense has changed so dramatically, that teams that execute at a high level, optimize the physical tools of the defenders on the floor with strategy and the ability to read the floor defensively.
Defense is played two ways, on-ball, and off-ball. For the context of the NBA draft, I look into the draft in full assumption that 99% of all eligible players for the NBA draft cannot defend at the NBA level. There are handfuls of players that I’ve liked on the defensive end, that had the reputation as a defender, and was comfortable about their transition next level. However, these players are the exception to the rule.
Just to name a couple of examples: De’Anthony Melton and Matisse Thybulle. They simply have outlier physical attributes in how they react to the ball, their awareness of their assignment, and how they extend and reach to force turnovers and block passing lanes.
In terms of the draft, I look for players that have some level of defensive IQ and the physical tools to at least be neutral, or, breakeven defenders. It may require some team strategy in order to make that happen. It requires development from the player as well. The game moves so fast. The game is so physical. The hardest part is to make players, defensive literate, with the conditioning to commit to what the team needs, throughout the entire game. Most rookie NBA players nowadays, are just trying to catch up in terms of condition and strength, prior to incorporating themselves as a neutral defender in a team scheme, let alone, a positively impactful player through multiple defensive schemes.
I default to looking at defensive indicators, as well as game tape, to indicate and help predict future defensive ability.
The baseline?
Initiators - 2%+ steal rate or higher. 0.5% block rate.
Wings - 2% steal rate. 2% block rate. Roughly 10% rebound rate.
Bigs - 1% steal rate. 5% block rate. 14% rebound rate. Less than 5 fouls per 40 minutes.
These indicators hint at the idea of a player’s intuitive ability to deflect the basketball, a baseline level of awareness in an individual and team setting, and a player’s motor. The less than 5 fouls per 40? That shows a ton of defensive discipline, especially when tied along to those baseline advanced numbers.
That baseline level of literacy, reaction time, and general ability to disrupt an offensive player or team, and end possessions rebounding rate, is a great foundation that can help lead to further player development defensively.
Communication, decision making, and execution can help raise the level of team defense. Players are so good at the NBA level, that it is virtually impossible to stop the best players one-on-one. It takes an entire team to contain the best players. With a high level of team defensive execution, players that aren’t great individual defenders, can stay on the floor and find other ways to be a positive contributing factor.
Rebounding
This is an immediately transferable NBA level skill. Teams can’t teach players “nose for the ball,” and the way players behave when a shot goes up is instinctual. Most players freeze and watch the shot. Other players, find ways to get into better position, putting their foot ahead of the opponent, boxing out an opponent anywhere on the floor, or just find themselves in movement, reading where the ball is going to land.
Rebounding, also hints at the idea of a player’s thought process and motor. Motor cannot be taught. Some players, just instinctually go after the basketball with extra effort, regardless of size. Dennis Rodman is the outlier version of that kind of motor. Younger Andre Drummond, is also a version of that motor. Those two guys can absolutely rebound, but when it comes to winning plays, it still boils down to finding a player, boxing out, getting a lead position, and ending the possession. Great rebounding teams as a whole do this, while poor rebounding teams can have one elite rebounder, and still give up a lot on the offensive glass. The key here is to get more possessions than the opponent. It’s the difference between winning basketball, and individual rebounding totals.
The Little Things
This is where I think teams understand they have to teach younger players to get them to the next level. It’s the little things. Boxing out, communicating on defense at point of attack, making proper screens, not committing offensive fouls on dribble-hand-off situations, staying defensively disciplined under the rim, knowing the personnel on the floor; all of these elements and more contribute to winning, not just a center that can shoot threes, switch defensively to guards, or a power forward that can initiate plays at the top of the key. It’s these fundamentals that get young players to floor and stay there, because if they aren’t scoring, the team on the floor still has to find a way to be a positive lineup, and these fundamentals contribute to that.
What Position On The Floor Do They Play?
The league has changed so much, especially within the last ten years. You can have 6’5” players play center, as long as they have the strength to hold guys in the post. You can have 6’10”+ players flash initiating skills (cheers to you Lamar Odom). The height of point guards and primary initiators is rising. Westbrook was pretty tall at 6’4”. Now it’s Luka Doncic, Shai Gilgeous Alexander, LeBron James, LaMelo Ball, Ben Simmons, Giannis Antetokounmpo, Tomas Satoransky, and several others all listed around 6’6” or taller and running offenses. While I may not agree that all of them should be running an offense, they all have the skill set to do so successfully at the NBA level.
My point? Positions are no longer sized based. They are skill based. A player that doesn’t play to their best skills because they’re in a different role or position on the floor, isn’t as likely to be a positive contributor, and not every player excels with that level of confinement within a position or particular role.
How Do You Evaluate The Best Player?
What does the player do best on the floor? Can teams stop it? Can the best defenders stop it? What is the running total you can add up for opportunity points? Does the team convert those opportunity points?
Also, worth considering: Are they leaders? Can they develop teammates and galvanize and organization?
Simply put, the best players in the league can do all of these things.
Sum It Up
Observing the draft for this period of time has been an exercise in patience. It’s odd, watching some teams stick to certain philosophies that haven’t been as successful in the past, while other teams take risks and find franchise players later in the draft.
Ayrton Senna once said, “If you no longer go for a gap you are no longer a racing driver.”
Well, if you’re not taking chances on best players available, in full understanding how to separate skills, athletic abilities, size, and intangibles, are you even a scout?