The Bratwurst – Milwaukee Bucks Blog

Now that the dust from the lottery has settled, it’s time to take another look at the mock draft.

First of all, I heard a third-hand rumor (from a pretty good source) that the Bulls are considering an offer from Memphis to exchange the #1 pick for Mike Conley and the #5. Apparently John Paxson really wants Kevin Love, and is considering taking the trade. Obviously the Grizzlies — desperate for a draw in Memphis — would take Derrick Rose.

When it’s all said and done, I highly doubt the Bulls would accept that trade. This is the NBA — you simply don’t trade the #1 pick. Also, taking Love would basically mean that Paxson is admitting that drafting Tyrus Thomas (and trading LaMarcus Aldridge in the process) was a mistake. Trading away a chance at a local kid who might become a superstar — Paxson would be absolutely destroyed in the media for pulling that one.

Anyway, I’m going to do another projection of the top 14 picks in the draft, thinking more about team needs than my prospect rankings. There are a few changes from version 1.0.

1: Chicago: Derrick Rose. No way the Bulls accept that Memphis trade.

The more I think about it, the more I believe that this trade has already been rejected and is only one of about 50 similar proposals that the Bulls will receive. The information came to me through a casual conversation, and I doubt that the source would have revealed anything important. What is most interesting is that John Paxson would actually be thinking about ways to get Kevin Love. Now that Love has lost some weight his draft stock must really be rising — I also saw an article on draftexpress.com saying that Kevin McHale wants him too. It all makes it sound like Love will not be around when the Bucks go on the clock at #8.

2: Miami: Michael Beasley. There are some rumors going around that Beasley may measure closer to 6′7″ at the Orlando predraft camp, and other rumors that Miami is interested in OJ Mayo. Why would they want Mayo unless they fear that Dwyane Wade will never be the same player? Hmmm. Anyway, I still think they take Beasley.

3: Minnesota: OJ Mayo. Everything that I read makes it sound like GM’s are starting to believe that Mayo’s poor season at USC was a product of Tim Floyd’s offense than Mayo’s game. Whatever, I still don’t buy it, I still think he’s a young Larry Hughes. No matter how good he looks in workouts or against high school students, if he was that good then his game should have shone in college as well. One interesting tidbit I learned about him this week — Mayo scored a 29 on his ACT. You would assume that since he changed high schools so many times he would have been a lackluster student, but apparently that is not the case. Apparently Kevin McHale (like John Paxson) also wants Kevin Love, and so may try to trade down.

4: Seattle: Jerryd Bayless. Despite what I wrote about Kevin Love being a good partner for Kevin Durant, now I feel that the Sonics will look to boost their backcourt instead. It’s a mistake, but still ….

5: Memphis: Kevin Love. It wouldn’t surprise me if they make this pick for someone else, but Love would be a good fit alongside the athletic Rudy Gay in Memphis’ frontcourt. Hopefully Love has 9,000 friends in Memphis to help fill their stadium.

6: New York: Danilo Gallinari. When I wrote version 1.0 I completely forgot that Mike D’Antoni has known Gallinari since he was a child. D’Antoni played with Gallinari’s father in Italy and apparently has been keeping tabs on him ever since.

7: LA Clippers: Eric Gordon. Yikes, if the draft falls this way then Gordon is the only top prospect left who would fit the Clippers’ roster.

8: Milwaukee: Russell Westbrook. Since the Bucks don’t need Brook Lopez they probably go for the best avalilable player (if the draft shakes out like this — I trust that Minnesota, Memphis or LA will screw it up), and at this point it is between Westbrook and Anthony Randolph. They sure don’t need another soft, skinny 6′11″ player, so Westbrook is the choice.

9: Charlotte: Brook Lopez. They can’t really take Roy Hibbert, right?

10: New Jersey: Anthony Randolph. Good situation for Randolph, as he gets two years to fine-tune his game before LeBron comes to town.

11: Indiana: DJ Augustin. I still think they want to have a replacement for Jamaal Tinsley ready to go should they finally manage to trade him.

12: Sacramento: Darrell Arthur. They need anything but a shooting guard and a center, and Arthur would probably be considered the best player available.

13: Portland: Chase Budinger. I’m not changing my opinion about this pick. Portland is probably trying to trade down.

14: Golden State: Ty Lawson. I still think that Don Nelson — should he still be afilliated with the team — would salivate at a chance to coach Lawson.

In an interview with the Journal-Sentinel, Charlie Villanueva says that he feels that he’s the odd man out with the Bucks and will probably be traded soon. No big news there, it seems pretty obvious that he would be on the trading block.

But what can the Bucks get for him? It’s actually kind of tough to come up with good Villanueva trades because of his salary. Basically, he can only be traded for players who make a similar amount of money to his $3.5 million, which means that most of the people he could be traded for are either overpaid benchwarmers or valuable young players who would never be traded by their current teams.

So I went through the league and came up with 12 potential trades. Most of them are highly unrealistic, a couple of them are just plain dumb, and most of them aren’t really what you would call “blockbusters”. But it just goes to show you how difficult it is to actually come up with a good trade that both teams might do.

Here they are, in reverse order of how realistic they are:

REALLY DUMB IDEAS:

Phoenix: Shaquille O’Neal and the #15 pick for Redd and Villanueva. I only include this because in Phoenix’s twisted world of luxury tax avoidance they would see this trade as saving them money. Phoenix loses the 2yrs/$20 mil on Shaq’s deal, saves $1 million next year and $1-$5 mil the following season if they let Villanueva walk. However they then pick up Redd’s $18 mil 2010/11 contract , it makes no sense but that’s the same financial logic they used in the Shaq-Marion trade. Shaq’s game has slipped to the point that the Bucks would laugh at a proposal like this, and I’m sure that he would come to Milwaukee and instantly get “hurt” anyway, so it’s pointless to continue speculating. But it’s kind of fun to imagine the in-his-prime 1999 version of Shaq on this team.

Indiana: Danny Granger and Travis Diener for Villanueva and the #8 pick. Strange deal that doesn’t really work for either team. Granger is the Pacers’ best player (so no reason for them to trade him away) but he’s eligible for an extension soon (so the Bucks would be grabbing the right to give him $12 mil a season). And it costs the Bucks a top 10 pick. Just an all-around bad idea. I only included this trade because having 12 trade ideas sounds better than just 11.

Chicago: S&T Luol Deng + Kirk Hinrich for Redd, Villanueva and the #8 pick. No way on earth this trade happens , both because it is inside the division and John Paxson isn’t going to trade Deng and Hinrich to Scott Skiles , but it makes some sense if the Bulls take Derrick Rose.

Toronto: TJ Ford and the #17 pick for Mason and Villanueva. Talk about irony , Villanueva and Ford traded for each other again? This trade would clear room for Toronto to commit to Jose Calderon as their starter and would save them money once Mason’s contract expires. Obviously, if Toronto wanted Villanueva they wouldn’t have traded him away in the first place, though.

PRETTY DUMB IDEA:

Denver: Carmelo Anthony for Williams, Villanueva and the #8 pick. While rumor has it that Denver would entertain offers for Anthony, if they were to take an offer like this then you’d have to wonder what is so wrong with Anthony that Denver would accept it. Anthony has spent years replacing his reputation as a clean-cut kid who makes the players around him better with that of a sullen, me-first scorer who doesn’t play defense, is known as one of the league’s hardest partiers, and recently picked up a DUI at 4am. This trade also leaves Denver with the smallest backcourt in the league in Mo and Iverson.

NOT ALL THAT DUMB, BUT STILL WOULD NEVER HAPPEN:

Atlanta: S&T Josh Smith for Simmons, Villanueva and the #8 pick. It seems unlikely that the Hawks would let Smith get away, but you never really know with them. There have been stories that they don’t want to pay him big money because of his personality and they may want to get a top 10 pick (their pick this year goes to Phoenix) but it’s very unlikely that anyone would let a player that talented get away.

Philadelphia: The #16 pick for Villanueva. The Sixers are $15-$20 mil under the salary cap, and if they like what they currently have then they may be more interested in adding a player than in risking a bust in the draft. It’s unlikely, though. This trade would have to be consumated after the draft.

Cleveland: Wally Szczerbiak for Simmons and Villanueva. Interesting trade , not for the on-court ramifications, but the off-court ones. Szczerbiak has one year on his contract ($13 mil) and Simmons and Villanueva two ($15 mil in 09/10 if Villanueva signs the 1 year qualifying offer). Basically this trade would allow Cleveland to postpone a big salary coming off of their cap next offseason until the following year, when LeBron will be a free agent. The Bucks would save $10-$14 million in 09/10.

MAKES A LITTLE SENSE:

Dallas: Josh Howard for Mason, Villanueva and the #8 pick. Just how serious is Dallas about making wholesale changes? Howard’s contract is relatively low risk (2 years plus a team option) and I’m sure the Bucks would jump at this deal. The Mavs would have to be seriously disillusioned about Howard (after his stoner comments and poor playoffs) to consider a deal like this, but if there’s a player in the draft who they really want they may be willing to make the splashy move.

Memphis: Brian Cardinal, Hakim Warrick and the #5 pick for Mason, Villanueva and the #8. This trade would give Memphis some cap relief (Cardinal has 2 years remaining on his contract, and Mason only one) and keeps them in the top 10 in the draft, while pretty much assuring the Bucks a shot at Kevin Love. If Memphis is interested in trading down, this would be fair.

New Jersey: Stromile Swift and the #10 pick for Charlie Bell, Charlie Villanueva and the #8. If New Jersey sees a player they want they may be interested in moving up a couple of spots to get him. Swift’s contract has one year left, and should the Nets then resign Villanueva to a 1 year qualifying offer, then he would be gone the following year and this trade would help New Jersey’s master plan of being under the cap when LeBron opts out of his contract in 2 years.

Orlando: Brian Cook and the #22 pick for Villanueva. While Cook is pretty much useless, this trade should land the Bucks in the perfect spot to get Richard Hendrix while still allowing them to keep their other two picks. Orlando gets a player who can help them now (instead of risking that their draft pick doesn’t pan out) and the ability to move Rashard Lewis back to small forward without losing a key contributor.

What does this show you? While Villanueva has talent, he’s not exactly going to command much of a premium around the league. He’s not so good that he can command a valuable, inexpensive player in return; nor is he so valuable that he would be much of an incentive in packaging him with one of the Bucks’ bad contracts for a really good player.

John Hammond has his work cut out for him. Of all of these trades, the only one I could see the other party likely to do is the one with Orlando, and I’m sure Hammond thinks he can get more than the #22 pick for a guy who was the runner-up ROY a couple of years ago.

Now that the lottery is done, it’s time to move on to the most meaningless thing I could possibly do — writing a draft projection. It’s silly to act as though I have some sort of insight into the thought processes of every GM in the league, and could likely do no better than getting 2 or 3 picks correct.

But I’m not letting that stop me. Here’s how I see the picks by the 14 lottery teams shaking out.

As I have been writing, I have plenty of opinions about who should be taken in what order, but tonight I’m going to write about who will be taken. I’m not really looking at my rankings, but more importantly am considering team needs and the perceived value of the available talent.

1-Chicago: Derrick Rose. It’s tough to say whether the Bulls will go for Rose or Michael Beasley, but I think that when the chips are down that John Paxson will be more interested in the potential of the home-grown Rose over the low-post ability of Beasley. With Ben Gordon’s contract status up in the air and the Bulls so heavily invested in the progress of Tyrus Thomas (after trading LaMarcus Aldridge for him), I think that in the end Paxson will go for the guard.

2-Miami: Michael Beasley. Talk about a no-lose situation — either the Heat get a next-generation point guard or a low-post force to remind people of the Shaq/Wade combination. Miami would be just about the perfect destination for Beasley.

3-Minnesota: Brook Lopez. Kevin McHale has already talked about how he felt that the main thing he wants to change about his team for next season will be to add a center to allow Al Jefferson to move to his natural power forward. Of course, Lopez is completely the wrong type of center to install alongside Jefferson (a weak rebounder whose main skill is scoring), but never put it beyond McHale to ignore something like that.

4-Seattle: Kevin Love. In one final insult to Seattle fans before their team sneaks off to Oklahoma, they take the local kid. According to ESPN.com’s Chad Ford, Love has been working hard to alleviate the major concern about him – his weight. He has dropped 13 pounds (to 258) since the end of the NCAA Tournament, and should his conditioning translate to solid workouts he would likely fly up draft boards. Sonics’ GM Sam Presti is an excellent judge of talent would would be more likely to take a player who has proven himself as a good player rather than a raw athlete. Love’s game should complement Kevin Durant well, as he can play power forward or center, depending on which forward position Durant matures into. Seattle could also use backcourt help, but Love would be too talented for the Sonics to pass up.

5-Memphis: Anthony Randolph. A team going nowhere may as well take a flyer. After denuding their roster in the Pau Gasol trade, the Grizzlies have two valuable pieces in place in Mike Conley and Rudy Gay. This means that they don’t need a small forward (Danilo Galinari), and undersized guard (Jerryd Bayless, Eric Gordon) or a potential headache (OJ Mayo). Randolph has been compared favorably to Chris Bosh, and with the Grizzlies so far away from competing they can afford to wait a year or two for him to blossom.

6-New York: Jerryd Bayless. With Mike D’Antoni in place, Bayless looks like the type of guy to fit into his system well. He’s probably the best athlete available, and point guard is the only position where the Knicks would be likely to grab a starter in this draft. Early rumors had Donnie Walsh tabbing Texas A&M center DeAndre Jordan, but that wouldn’t make any sense.

7-LA Clippers: OJ Mayo. Even if Mayo eventually becomes something closer to Larry Hughes than an all-star (I believe he’s not as talented as many people think) he could fit in extremely well with the Clippers. If Shaun Livingston should come back (a big if), then the Clippers could roll out a starting five next season of Livingston, Mayo, Corey Maggette, Elton Brand and Chris Kaman — a lineup that would see Mayo as the smallest player but probably the best athlete (which is a complement). Mayo fills a need.

8-Milwaukee: Eric Gordon. As I have written before, I would prefer that the Bucks trade down to get Richard Hendrix, but at this point in the draft there are two “top” prospects left in Gordon and Danilo Gallinari (”top” in quotations because I have real questions about both of them). Even though Gordon doesn’t really fill a need here, I think that the Kelvin Sampson connection will see Gordon wearing a Bucks jersey next season. With his devastatingly quick first step, I think there is a chance that Gordon could become a special Dwyane Wade-type player at some point, but not immediately. However, he would combine with Ramon Sessions to form a pretty potent second unit backcourt next season. Keep an eye on Gordon’s predraft measurements — if he turns out to be 6′2″ instead of 6′3″ he might fall out of the top 15, but if he is 6′4″ he might be gone before the Bucks get their pick.

9: Charlotte: Roy Hibbert. Much like Minnesota, the Bobcats need a center who can allow Emeka Okafor to move out of the post. Michael Jordan loves drafting proven college players (preferably ones who will really suck in the pros), and Hibbert fills the bill perfectly. Hibbert is huge, slow, and had a productive college career. But guys like him — over 7 feet and over 270 pounds — rarely develop into much more than borderline starters. However, after seeing Jordan draft players like Juan Dixon, Jared Jefferies and Adam Morrison, I just can’t imagine him taking a younger, less proven player with Hibbert available.

10: New Jersey: Danilo Gallinari. Despite the presence of Richard Jefferson and Vince Carter, Gallinari will prove too tantalizing a prospect to pass on at #10. He’s a couple of years away, but it will take that long for enough years to drop off of Jefferson’s contract for him to become tradeable.

11: Indiana: DJ Augustin. They have been desperate to move Jamaal Tinsley’s off-court baggage for years, and Augustin could be ready to step in behind him quickly. However, all of the off-court stuff dragged the Pacers’ attendance to dead last in the league this past season, and they might be desperate to make a splash — such as by obtaining local product Eric Gordon. Perhaps a trade with the Bucks here? The #8 pick (Gordon) for the #11 and Indiana’s first rounder next year? It’s a little early to take Hendrix here (unless some other GM’s read this blog, in which case the Bucks better grab him here) but Indiana’s pick next year could be #1 overall.

12: Sacramento: Russell Westbrook. After Kevin Martin, this team has a lot of problems. Westbrook is probably the most highly-regarded player available at this point.

13: Portland: Chase Budinger. Portland is kind of the opposite of Sacramento — they don’t really have any pressing needs. I’m not as high on Budinger as many people seem to be (he doesn’t shoot well for a supposed great shooter, and doesn’t put up very well-rounded numbers for a supposedly well-rounded player), but the Blazers would love to find a player who can both back up Brandon Roy a little and also bring some better defensive presence to the small forward spot.

14: Golden State: Ty Lawson. Lets see, who is the best available athlete? Best case scenario is that Lawson explodes onto the scene and pushes Baron Davis out of the door, the more likely scenario is that he becomes a nice change-of-pace backup (tongue planted in cheek — the only way Lawson “changes” the Golden State pace of play is to make them play faster). Despite being only 5′11″, I actually think Lawson will be pretty good. He’s incredibly fast and pretty strong.

So when it’s all said and done, how many picks will I have called correctly? I’d guess … I’d be doing well if I get four.

Cross your fingers and rub your good luck charms, because the NBA Draft lottery is tonight (7pm Central, ESPN).

The Bucks have a 4.3% chance of getting the #1 pick and a 15% chance of moving into the top 3. Most likely (60%) they will be #7.

I’m yawning in anticipation!

(Click Here for my updated list of 2008 NBA Draft Prospects)

After looking further into my recent draft preview, I started to think that there were some flaws in my methodology. While I believe that it was very useful in pinpointing players which may be undervalued, and at pointing out that there may be major flaws in the games of some top prospects, can you really say that OJ Mayo and Jerryd Bayless shouldn’t even be drafted? Even if they turn out to be busts, will there really be 40 other prospects who would actually be better than them?

Because of this, I decided that my results were not passing the “sniff test”, and after thinking a little more, I figured out why.

After creating my system I fine-tuned it by comparing it to the results of the 2002-2007 drafts, which meant that I was applying my system only to lists of players who were actually drafted. However, for this seasons’ preview, I compared it to about 85 players. This skewed the rankings because many of the additional players , who have little to no chance of being drafted , might do a little better in one or two categories than some of the more-heralded prospects, dropping the rankings of several talented players.

So I realized that I needed to set up my rankings in tiers to compare “apples to apples”. Overall, scouts do a pretty good job of pinpointing the most talented players, but they have a hard time filtering out the busts. But it is extremely rare that an undrafted player will turn out to have been worth a high pick. So I broke down my rankings into three lists , Likely first and high-second round picks, Potential second round picks, and Likely undrafted players.

To create my lists, I went to three sources of mock drafts , www.draftexpress.com, www.nbadraft.net, and ESPN.com’s top 100 prospect list. To make my first list (”Likely draftees”) a player had to be mentioned in both mock drafts and the top 50 of ESPN’s list (exceptions made for Marreese Speights and JJ Hickson, whom NBADraft.net still has listed as a part of the 2009 draft). Players mentioned on one or two of the lists were considered a potential second rounder, players not mentioned are likely to go undrafted. There are several foreign players that are projected draftees for whom I was unable to get reliable statistics, so I ignored them.

That gave me a list of 39 likely draftees and 20 potential second rounders, which when combined with 8-10 foreign players should come pretty close to making up the actual draft. I also rank 31 players who are unlikely to be drafted. The list is available here.

The overall rankings changed a little bit as players were compared more closely to other peers of a similar skill level. A few highlights include:

The new Top-10 (and how they compare to their previous ranking):

1: Michael Beasley (still #1)
2: Derrick Rose (up 2 spots)
3: Kevin Love (down 1)
4: Richard Hendrix (down 1)
5: Anthony Randolph (up 6)
6: JJ Hickson (Winner of the Cedric Simmons award for “most likely to be a bust and screw up my methodology.”) (up 2)
7: Mario Chalmers (down 2)
8: Marreese Speights (down 1)
9: Ty Lawson (down 3)
10: Kosta Koufos (up 3)

Some other interesting changes:

Brook Lopez falls from #9 overall to the #14 rank and the #2 center. There was a very slim margin separating the #10 and #18 prospects (10 points) and while Lopez was a little better than Koufos in every respect, Koufos gets the nod because he is a year younger. Meanwhile, Brook’s twin brother Robin, an energetic Anderson Varejao clone (even with the hair), becomes the #15 prospect.

The three shooting guards that were pounded in my previous rankings moved up (Eric Gordon goes to #19, while OJ Mayo and Jerryd Bayless tie at #25) but still don’t appear to represent lottery talent. While they will all still be taken in the top 12, my rankings show that their relatively low college production indicates that there are no sure things with taking any of these guys , I’m sure at least one of them will wind up being pretty good, but it is likely that at least one will be a major disappointment.

Danilo Galinari slipped to #28, and I think that this has to raise the question of just how athletic he really is. His poor rebounding isn’t the only concern about him (small forwards who don’t rebound well actually get a boost in my rankings), his other rankings that try to measure his athleticism do not stack up well either. Perhaps he was physically overmatched by playing against older competition at the highest European level and his true athletic ability will take time to show, but I would still be concerned. I wouldn’t draft him unless I had been able to see him play “¦ a lot.

A possible steal is Washington State shooting guard Kyle Weaver, who ranks #11 on my draft board. He has good size, at 6′6″, and while his overall production was fairly mediocre (0.77 IPM) he takes care of the ball and his other ratios suggest that he should be enough of an athlete to make an impact at the defensive end. He is a player who might be available for the Bucks in the second round. Another example of a player who ranked highly in my system without an offensive game was Renaldo Balkman.

Looking way down the list, among the players unlikely to get drafted who I might be interested in would be Missouri’s highly productive Leo Lyons (1.00 IPM) and Memphis’ bruising Robert Dozier. Bad news for fans of Jerell McNeal, as he falls into the trap of being a 6′3″ shooting guard. None of the mock drafts I looked at believe he will be picked.

When the Bucks had the #1 pick in 2005, they spent the entire run-up to the draft debating between Andrew Bogut and Marvin Williams, apparently not giving much thought to taking Chris Paul. Obviously, with the benefit of hindsight, this turned out to be a mistake, even though Bogut has become one of the better big men in the league.

In December I wrote that even though Paul has turned out to be better, at the time taking Bogut was still most likely the best move, simply because big men who are worthy of being the #1 pick simply don’t come along that often. Since then Bogut has lived up to expectations, while Paul has exceeded them. My draft ranking methodology doesn’t solve the issue, either, as it ranked Paul as the #1 prospect by the thinnest of margins over Bogut.

But don’t you wonder what would have happened had Larry Harris made a different choice on draft night 2005?

Maybe the ensuing three years would look something like this:

Draft night, 2005: Despite having the 6-foot TJ Ford and 6-1 Mo Williams on the roster, Larry Harris makes the bold move of selecting the 6-foot point guard Chris Paul with the #1 overall pick. The choice is immediately lambasted by every commentator within reach of a microphone or keyboard, as they all immediately point out that Paul is too short to even reach the top shelf at the supermarket. “Larry Harris is an Earl Boykins signing away from cornering the market on midget point guards,” ESPN.com’s Bill Simmons would write. Harris defends himself, saying that the goal was to take the best player available and that the Bucks now have several talented trade chips if TJ Ford is healthy, and a good backup plan if he is not.

2005 Offseason: Larry Harris solidifies his frontcourt by signing Dan Gadzuric (fresh off of a season in which he started 81 games and helped propel the Bucks to 30 wins) to a 6 year, $36 million contract. Asked why he would offer a six year deal to a player who was about to turn 27 years old, Harris said, “Because the 9-year deal he actually signed was rejected by the league office.” When pressed further on why he would commit so much money to a player who had never averaged fewer than 6 fouls per 40 minutes, Harris replied, “What do you mean? $36 million? It’s $3.6 million! It was supposed to be $3.6 million!” before a glazed look came over his eyes, and he frantically ran out of the room while dialing his cell phone.

In July, the Bucks hire Terry Stotts as their new head coach. When reached at the Terry Porter Point Guard Camp for his reaction to the hiring, former head coach Terry Porter said, “That sounds like a good move. After playing in the NBA for 15 years I would obviously have nothing to offer these guys.”

Still patting himself on the back for signing Bobby Simmons and Dan Gadzuric, Larry Harris realizes that he completely forgot that both Gadzuric and Zaza Pachulia were both restricted free agents, so he never actually had to offer Gadzuric anything in the first place. He declines to match an offer to Pachulia from Atlanta for 4 years/$16 million.

Forced to move to Oklahoma City and attempting to clear space for their first round draft pick, Andrew Bogut, get a point guard, and drum up local interest, the Hornets trade Jamaal Magloire and a lottery-protected first round pick to Milwaukee for Desmond Mason and Mo Williams. Three years later, the Bucks have yet to collect on this pick, as New Orleans has not won more than 35 games in a season.

2005 Season: The Bucks debut the season with a starting lineup of TJ Ford, Michael Redd, Bobby Simmons, Joe Smith and Jamaal Magloire. First round pick Chris Paul shows potential but is incredibly turnover prone, as for some inexplicable reason he is seemingly incapable of throwing an entry pass that Magloire or Gadzuric can catch. It is obviously a weakness in Paul’s game, and one which he simply must rectify. Many columns are written about how taking a small, turnover prone point guard with the #1 pick is always a horrible idea , especially with a perfectly good big man available. However, the Bucks’ record on the court is pretty good, and by New Years, they sit a surprising third in the division.

By March, the Bucks’ record has cooled off a bit, mostly because after Joe Smith’s annual 25-game injury, the team was forced to move Dan Gadzuric into the starting lineup at power forward. That really wasn’t so much a problem, as he actually played pretty well when on the floor, but he averaged seven fouls per 36 minutes played, meaning that it was impossible to keep him on the floor for more than 20 minutes a night.

Meanwhile, a minor point guard controversy was developing, as while TJ Ford’s statistics were a little better than Chris Paul’s, the team “just seems to play better” with Paul on the court.

By the end of the season, Chris Paul supplanted TJ Ford as the starting point guard, and the Bucks would finish on a 6-4 run to win 43 games and take the #5 spot in the playoffs. Despite Paul’s averaging 27 points and 14 assists in the playoffs, the Bucks would lose in seven games to the New Jersey Nets, as the veteran savvy of Jason Kidd carries the day.

Chris Paul would finish second in the rookie of the year balloting to Andrew Bogut, who would be credited with helping the Hornets overcome the horrors of Hurricane Katrina and the paltry fan support in Oklahoma City, and propelling them to 27 wins.

Many media members, however, had tabbed Chris Paul as a savvy draft pick and a future star, with most columnists and pundits saying, “I was right all along about him.”

2006 Offseason: As soon as the season is over, Larry Harris decides that the time is right to commit to Chris Paul as the starting point guard and trades TJ Ford to Toronto for Charlie Villanueva. On draft night, picking at #19, Harris takes the highest-rated small forward still available on my draft scoreboard, Renaldo Balkman.

With Villanueva given the starting power forward job, the Bucks would require one more season of the services of Jamaal Magloire for his only apparent NBA skill , rebounding.

2006 Season: Despite starting the season on a down note with the loss of Bobby Simmons, the Bucks do surprisingly well thanks to the stellar play of Chris Paul (and the surprising defensive tenacity of Balkman). Paul and Villanueva instantly develop fantastic on-court chemistry, as Charlie V seemingly completes three alley-oop plays a game. However, despite Magloire’s best efforts, the Bucks are constantly pounded on the glass, which keeps their record from become anything superlative.

The season would take a turn for the worse with an injury to Charlie Villanueva in November, a sprained ankle in December that would cost Chris Paul 20 games, and a knee injury in January to Michael Redd, and eventually an injury to Joe Smith. In a desperate bid to remain in contention, Larry Harris trades Magloire to Portland for Brian Skinner and Steve Blake, but it does not work. It gets so bad that in one game the Bucks are forced to start Lynn Greer, Steve Blake, Ersan Illyasova, the “19-year-old” Damir Markota, and Gadzuric; a game that would see the Bucks set two NBA records by scoring only 40 points on 9% shooting. Without Chris Paul in the lineup, the Bucks would go 1-19 and on nights when neither Paul or Redd are available, they will go 1-26.

By the time Chris Paul and Michael Redd return from injury the season is long lost, and there are rumors that Terry Stotts’ job security is tenuous. Chris Paul refutes these rumors, saying; “I’m going to make Stotts “˜coach of the year’, and if he’s not here than neither am I.”

In March, assistant coach Larry Krystkowiak would leave the team to take the head coaching position at the University of Utah.

The Bucks would finish the disappointing, injury-riddled season with 32 wins (31-24 when Paul and Redd both suit up), tied with the Portland Trail Blazers for the 6th worst record in the league. In a coin flip for lottery position, the Bucks would take the #6 spot and the Blazers #7.

2006 Off-Season: Incredibly, the Bucks would win the NBA Draft Lottery for the second time in 3 years, and would select Ohio State center Greg Oden.

With the Bucks sitting about $10 million under the salary cap, Larry Harris considers offering a max contract to Rashard Lewis and creating a sign-and-trade with Seattle, before realizing that would be stupid, and also makes a serious offer to Gerald Wallace, who rebuffs the Bucks to resign with Charlotte for slightly more. It seems quite silly for Harris to pursue these options, since Balkman is a considerably less expensive option for the small forward position, but is probably equally as good. What the Bucks need now, since Charlie Villanueva is coming off of a major injury, is a power forward, but they feel confident that Oden will at the very least anchor their defense.

But there are no good power forwards on the free agent marketplace. Harris is seriously considering going into the season well under the salary cap until he hears that the Atlanta Spirit Group, owners of the Atlanta Hawks, had nixed a three-way, pre-draft trade that would have sent Kevin Garnett to Phoenix, the #3 and #11 draft picks (Al Horford and Acie Law), players and a huge trade exception from the Hawks to Minnesota (the Hawks being under the cap, they could take in more salary then they sent out, and the excess is sent back out as a trade exception , essentially “free” cap room for the team receiving it to do with as they see fit) and Amare Stoudemire to Atlanta (note: this offer really did happen, and Atlanta really did shoot it down).

Harris immediately resurrected the trade talks, and eventually brokered a trade sending Kevin Garnett to Phoenix, Amare Stoudemire, Raja Bell and DJ Strawberry to Milwaukee, while Minnesota received Greg Oden, Dan Gadzuric, a $10 million trade exception, and three first round picks (the Bucks’ 2008 pick, and two of Phoenix’s picks). Harris would then quickly resign Joe Smith to back up Villanueva. Unfortunately for Minnesota, Kevin McHale would personally perform Greg Oden’s team physical, and not notice that he needed microfracture knee surgery and would miss the season.

2007 Season: Moving Stoudemire to center and utilizing the offensive skills of Paul, Redd, Villanueva and Stoudemire, Terry Stotts opened up the offense and tried to run everyone else off of the court. After winning 18 of their first 25 games and running an offense that had them nicknamed, “Phoenix East”, the Bucks were the toast of the NBA. Stoudemire and Redd would both average over 25 points per game, both of them and Chris Paul would become All-Stars, and the Bucks would be hailed as the best, most exciting, and best-managed team in the East.

But the true strength of this team would come from its chemistry. It’s funny how often chemistry in basketball has to do with people feeling they are getting enough shots, but considering that the Bucks played at a very fast pace and also started one non-offensively inclined player in Balkman, getting enough shots for Paul, Redd, Villanueva and Stoudemire was not too difficult, minus a few hiccups along the way. At one point, when Redd complained about only getting 22 shots in a game against the Heat, Paul dragged a stool across the locker room, stood on it to see eye-to-eye to Redd and said something along the lines of : “%&@* %$*(^#^%* ($(*&#%$ ^%*@(^%*(%$#^ *#$%^)(*A%()^ you”.

This established once and for all just who the team leader really was, and Redd responded by averaging over 30 points per game for the next 8, all Bucks wins.

By the end of the season, the Bucks had compiled a 58-24 regular season record, were the #2 seed in the East behind Detroit. The well-read blog, www.thebratwurst.com, nearly folded due to the lack of material to complain about.

Terry Stotts is named coach of the year, and Larry Harris is named executive of the year. He signs a nine year “¦ no, make that six year “¦ contract extension.

Chris Paul would be named prominently in MVP conversation all season, but would eventually finish second behind Kobe Bryant.

In the first round of the playoffs, the young and athletic Bucks have no trouble with the similarly young, but less talented, Philadelphia 76ers, while the #1 seed Pistons were pushed to game seven by the Atlanta Hawks. Things were looking good for this Milwaukee Bucks team to make a return to the finals in “¦a long, long time. Where they would likely meet the Steve Nash/Kevin Garnett led Phoenix Suns.

2038 Offseason: After 31 seasons as the head coach at the University of Utah, Coach Larry Krystkowiak announces his retirement. Best known for his mantra of “defense, hustling, and playing as a team”, his legacy includes over 800 wins, nine final fours, and four national championships. He would never coach a single player who goes on to play in the NBA.

Yesterday I talked about the five top prospects who are likely to fall short, and today I bring to you the sleeper of this years’ NBA draft. The player who despite having a pedigree as a McDonalds All-American and highly-sought after recruit, three years of solid production at a big-time school and an NBA body, has been so ignored by the powers-that-be that he hasn’t even hired an agent and may return to school for his senior season.

He’s listed as my #3 prospect, and he’s my #1 candidate for this years “Steal of the Draft”.

First, a game of “Name the Power Forward”:

Player A is listed at 6′9, 258 and attended an ACC school. In his final college season he had an IPM of 1.084, shot 66% from the floor, averaged 0.305 rebounds per minute and had a combined total of 52 steals and blocks. He has become a 2-time NBA All-Star.

Player B is listed at 6′9, 240 and attended a high mid-major college. In his final college season he had an IPM of 1.107, shot 51% from the floor, averaged 0.324 rebounds per minute and had a combined total of 94 steals and blocks. He made his first All-Star team in the 2007-08 season.

Player C is listed at 6′10, 245 and attended an SEC school. In his final college season he had an IPM of 1.068, shot 61% from the floor, averaged 0.341 rebounds per minute and had a combined total of 98 steals and blocks. He was a high first-round pick and was a key contributor to his teams’ surprising push to the seventh game of their playoff series this year.

Player D is listed at 6′9, 255 and attends an SEC school. In his final college season he had an IPM of 1.147, shot 60% from the floor, averaged 0.330 rebounds per minute and had a combined total of 104 steals and blocks. He is projected by many as a second round pick.

Player A is Carlos Boozer.

Player B is David West.

Player C, clearly, is Al Horford.

But Player D has statistics that stack up well against these three top-tier players and yet is seemingly unknown around the NBA, seeing as I have yet to see him seriously mentioned as even a mid-first round pick. This guy will be the steal of the draft, and his name is:

Richard Hendrix, Alabama (22, 6′9, 255, Ranked #3): Hendrix did it all for a pretty average Alabama team this season, leading them in points, rebounds and blocks; was third in steals and fourth in assists, and was their only player to shoot over 50% from the floor for the season. However, Alabama lost their point guard, Ronald Steele, to an injury before the season and failed to qualify for the NCAA or NIT tournament, so Hendrix didn’t have a chance to display his skills to the wider tournament audience.

However, Hendrix wasn’t always an unknown. He was a McDonalds All-American out of High School and was a hyped recruit to Alabama in 2005. According to RSCIhoops.com, he ranked as the #7 high school player in the nation that season, and five of the six ahead of him are currently in the NBA (the other being Tyler Hansbrough). As I talked about in my OJ Mayo article, when players show big time talent at a young age, there is a good chance that they turn out pretty good.

In three years at Alabama, Hendrix didn’t burst onto the scene as some might have expected given his status as such a touted recruit, but he steadily improved, from a 0.76 IPM his freshman year to 0.993 his sophomore year to this seasons’ massive 1.147. He shows a very impressive rebounding skill (6th best rate among prospects this season), is able to take care of the ball impressively well for a big man who was the focus of his teams’ offense (51 assists vs. 55 turnovers this year), and does a good job of being active while staying out of foul trouble (averaging under 3 fouls per game, and getting 41 steals and 63 blocks against 94 fouls). There is no doubt that Hendrix is an NBA-caliber athlete, and the fact that he was such a high recruit and improved each year at Alabama suggests that his superior Junior season was not a fluke. In fact, I ran Hendrix’s statistics from his first two seasons, and despite supposedly being an underachiever, he would have been the #17 draft prospect in 2006 and #13 in 2007. So it’s not like he just burst onto the scene out of nowhere.

He is also apparently a pretty smart guy, on track to graduate from Alabama this summer after three years in school.

There are some knocks on Hendrix. First is his free throw shooting (53.7% this season) which declined from 63% his first two years, and that is a concern. The other question about him is his size and quickness , he may actually measure closer to 6′7 than 6′9, and some say that he might not have the most footspeed in the world. Well, being called “undersized” hasn’t seemed to stop Boozer, West or Paul Milsap. I think that nitpicking about a players’ footspeed is a little silly unless he is clearly so overweight he can barely get up and down the floor. It’s not like he has to sprint end to end constantly. It’s just as dumb as making a big deal out of the 40 yard dash time of an offensive lineman. The guy was quick enough to get into position for 2 blocks a game , what more do you want?

One other thing that I like about Hendrix is that he comes from Alabama, the home of the surprisingly good NBA player. In the last 20 years the Tide has seen several unheralded players go on to solid NBA careers, including Antonio McDyess (who was the #2 pick but was unknown before the NCAA Tournament his sophomore year), Latrell Sprewell, Robert Horry (I still remember the NBA Draft commentators saying; “Why would Houston take Horry when a talent like Harold Miner is still available?”), Gerald Wallace and, oh yes, Mo Williams. Even Jason Caffey stuck around in the NBA for 10 years.

I just can’t understand why he is flying under the radar so much: he put up great numbers, has a track record of improvement (so it’s not like he had a fluke season), carried a weakened team on his back in a tough conference to a .500 record, and apparently doesn’t have any character questions. If you are an NBA GM who wants a power forward who can grab loose balls, bang around in the paint, and shoot well enough to keep defenses honest, why would you look any further?

According to ESPN.com’s Chad Ford, GMs’ are a little more worried about Hendrix’s size than I am, and don’t seem to trust the quality of his numbers this season:

“Despite Hendrix’s NBA body, athleticism and excellent numbers in the SEC this season, scouts aren’t totally sold on him. They believe he is undersized for his position and needs polish on the offensive end. Still, Hendrix is smart to test the waters. He’s a junior and he can give teams a free look. If he impresses, he could go anywhere from the late teens to mid 20s. If he doesn’t impress, he can return to Alabama for his senior season.”

It kind of perplexes me how a player can have an “NBA body” in one sentence and be “undersized” in the next. I also wonder just how raw someone’s offensive game could possibly be if he led his team in scoring and shot 60%.

Since Hendrix is about to graduate early it seems interesting to me that he hasn’t hired an agent. Maybe he knows something about himself , such as that he may be shorter than advertised , that isn’t readily apparent. If he’s serious about turning himself into a high first round pick then he should hire an agent, who can then pay for his training to tune him into someone who will impress teams with his workout ability. But then again, maybe he is a little naïve about the process, maybe he honestly wants to stay in school if he’s not promised a high pick, or he just wants to let his work on the court speak for itself.

It seems to me that the real reason that scouts and GM’s have overlooked Hendrix is that the power forward position is very deep this year and Hendrix doesn’t have the “oomph” that other prospects have. Tossing aside Michael Beasley and Kevin Love, there are other guys available that offer more “uniqueness”. If you want a raw player who might be a Chris Bosh clone, go for Anthony Randolph. If you want a guy from a program with a winning pedigree that has put a ton of guys in the league over the last couple of years, go for Marreese Speights. If you want a workmanlike player who has been solid in a bruising conference then take DJ White.

But as for me, I want the best player.

If I was running the Bucks’ draft room , and did not move into the top three in the lottery , I would try to trade Villanueva and move down in the draft to get Hendrix. At the very least he should be a bruising, quality player who could come in the game and offer a nice change-of-pace to the finesse skills of Yi. In the best case scenario, he could become a dominant power player who scores at a high rate, pairs with Bogut to become one of the best rebounding frontcourts in the league, and also has the athleticism to do a little of everything else. Either way, it’s highly likely that he will a least be a good player.

Now that I have revealed the steal of the draft, here is the completed list of all of the prospects for this seasons’ NBA Draft. Over the course of the next few days I will offer a few comments about some of the other players who might go in the top 20 (funny how it’s nothing but power forwards and point guards this season, isn’t it?) and then a bit about the players who didn’t put their names into this years’ draft.

And then after the lottery on May 20, we can start thinking about projecting the draft.

Yesterday I introduced my new system for ranking NBA Draft prospects and illustrated how it has done over the last several years. I also talked about the top three prospects in this season’s draft. Today I want to move on to the other players who are projected to fill out the top eight.

When I developed my draft rankings, I was pleasantly surprised to see that the top 8-10 prospects consistently were similar to the actual top picks. When looking at the 2002-2007 drafts, there was only one prospect that was actually drafted in the top ten that my rankings completely tossed out of the window, and it turned out to be correct to do so: Adam Morrison.

This track record makes this years’ draft predictions very strange. Of the consensus top eight prospects, my methodology claims that some of these guys are no better than second-round picks. One explanation is that several of these players are very young and may simply have had poor seasons this past year. That is what happened with Thaddeus Young at Georgia Tech , he never got on track, and while he should have been drafted higher than #12, my rankings listed him as the #26 pick. But I don’t think that explains it all. Several years from now, people will be scratching their heads, wondering what happened to some of the top ten picks from this draft.

After the top couple of players, this draft gets tricky. There is the potential for some major busts here , the numbers point to gaping flaws in each of the remaining players. Buyer beware.

Here we go:

Brook Lopez, Stanford (C, 20, 7′0, 260, Ranked #9): Lopez sits pretty high in my rankings, but taking centers with high lottery picks (that aren’t top-2) is very risky. Players like Greg Oden (and even Andrew Bogut) , good enough to go #1 , don’t come by often but almost always become All-Stars. But for every Chris Kaman, there are plenty of centers taken between the 4th and 10th picks that are huge disappointments (Shelden Williams, Rafael Araujo and Patrick O’Bryant, to name a couple from the last six years).

The #1 question about Lopez it isn’t about his game , it’s about his head. Not his intelligence, but rather how much he really cares about basketball. You sort of have to wonder about a guy who at one point simply decided to quit going to class for a while and cost himself one semesters’ eligibility (”I was just being lazy“, he would tell Sports Illustrated).

While a little immaturity and lack of focus can be expected from any 20 year old, to play center in the NBA you have to simply love the game because of the incredible physical toll it will deliver to you (note: Andrew Bogut only missing two games after having surgery to repair a broken nose). Lopez’ flaking out because he was more interested in drawing cartoons with his brother than in studying hard enough to stay eligible for basketball “¦ well “¦ it’s a $50 million question: are you more interested in hoops or Walt Disney?

Physically, Lopez has the tools but I don’t really know how well his game will translate to the NBA. He scored about 20 ppg this season, but did it without shooting a terribly high percentage (47% FG), so if he drops to, say, a 41% shooter he will have become very inefficient. He’s an average rebounder, which projects to being a pretty poor pro rebounder. He did an excellent job as a shot blocker (56) considering he rarely got into foul trouble (66 pf’s in 27 games). His ability to avoid fouls played a large part in propelling him to the upper tier of my rankings.

One problem with judging Lopez is that scouts might mentally combine Brook with his much more energetic (but less talented) twin brother Robin, and hope that they are drafting an Anderson Varejao clone with more scoring ability. But the fact is that taking centers in the mid-lottery is risky business. Despite ranking pretty high, my guess is that Lopez will be a disappointment as well.

Where he will be drafted: Top eight.
Best teams for him: One with a bruising, offensively-challenged power forward. Charlotte.
Worst teams for him: One with a good center or who would count on him to make an immediate impact on both ends of the floor. Milwaukee, Memphis.

Eric Gordon, Indiana (SG, 20, 6′4, 215, Ranked #49): The numbers hate Gordon, but I think he might simply be a player who was stuck in a bad situation and had a pretty poor season as a result. Gordon posted a very poor IPM (0.761), which looks thoroughly pathetic considering that any college player will probably see his numbers drop in the NBA. However, besides playing with a wrist injury, he seemed to me to be stuck in a bad offense. Kelvin Sampson built his game plan around DJ White, and Gordon’s role often seemed to be little more than to catch the ball 30 feet from the basket, check and see if his defender had momentarily wandered off the court, and to then toss it to a teammate. Despite being strong, a good ball handler, and an eye-popping athlete, Gordon never seemed to get the ball inside the three-point line.

Despite that, Gordon still managed to set Indiana’s freshman scoring record, and displayed the single most indispensable asset for today’s NBA: a lightning quick first step.

EJ (his nickname , short for Eric Gordon, Jr) has often been compared to Ben Gordon since, you know, they are about the same size and both named Gordon. However, I think a better comparison is Dwyane Wade or Monta Ellis , a player who can be impossible to keep off of the foul line. Gordon is also an incredibly explosive dunker, and I think he will become a major fourth quarter force for someone, someday. The peak of his career may be kind of short because he will take a constant pounding by going to the basket (just as the miles seem to already be piling up for Wade) but Gordon could have a 3-4 year run as an unstoppable weapon at some point , just give him the ball at the end of the game and let him get layups or head to the foul line all night.

Of course, there is the question of Gordon’s size — I remember when he committed to Illinois as a High School junior he was “6′5″”, and then shrinked an inch or so every season after that. The day that the NBA measures the height of their prospects will be an important one for Gordon, for if he measures closer to 6′2″ than 6′4″, his draft stock will plummet, since he is definitely not a point guard.

Gordon would be better off staying in college for at least one more year (especially since he would be coached by the man that put Wade on the map) but he’s going for the money now. He’s a couple of years away, but I think he’s going to be good.

One subplot with him is that since Kelvin Sampson has joined Scott Skiles’ coaching staff, he will likely be on the Bucks’ radar.

Where he will be drafted: Top ten.
Best team for him: One that can afford to wait for him to blossom and that really needs to sell tickets in Indianapolis. Indiana.
Worst team for him: One that would want him to play point guard. New York.

Danilo Gallinari, Armani Milano (Italy) (20, 6′9, 209, Ranked #52): Ah, yes, another tall, skinny European who is young, thin, can’t rebound and is touted as “the next Toni Kukoc”. You know, that’s what they said about Ersan Ilyasova for a while too.

There’s not too much that can be said about Gallinari’s game because it all sounds like a rehash of what we’ve heard before. Tall kid, still growing, handles it like Magic Johnson, shoots like Nowitzki, etc, etc.

His numbers for Armani Milano are pretty solid. He averaged 17 ppg, 5 rpg and 1.5 apg against 1.6 to’s. However, he only shot 44 percent. He appears to have quick hands, getting 1.7 steals per game, and did a pretty good job of staying out of foul trouble. One major bright spot about him is that despite being so young he was good enough to see 33 minutes per game for a very good Armani team. But it all added up to an IPM of 0.792 , which would be quite good for a 20-year old NBA rookie, but international players usually see their numbers drop once they come to America.

Gallinari played a lot of minutes so five RPG sounds pretty bad, until you consider his age. He is only 19 years old and playing in the top leagues in Europe (The best European teams play in their own country and the multi-country Euroleague), so he has to go up against 28-year old men all the time. It might not be that big a deal that he gets pushed off of the boards so much, since he has to fight with much more mature people for the ball. Besides, he projects as a small forward , if he averages 5 rebounds a game it will be a solid contribution.

The real question about Gallinari, and one that I can’t answer, is: “will he be athletic enough to play small forward and guard the LeBron’s of the world”, because he sure isn’t going to be big enough to play power forward for several years. I’m not the person to make that call.

Where he will be drafted: Top ten.
Best teams for him: A team that can afford to wait for him to grow into his eventual NBA position. Charlotte, Minnesota, Miami.
Worst teams for him: A team looking for an instant starter at small forward. New York, Memphis.

OJ Mayo, USC (SG, 20, 6′5, 200, Ranked #54): About 20 years ago, Sports Illustrated wrote an article listing the most promising players at each grade from High School senior down to sixth grade. While the grade schoolers never panned out, the four high school players were (senior) Marcus Liberty, (junior) Alonzo Mourning, (soph) Penny Hardaway and (freshman) Damon Bailey. Three NBA players (including an all-star and a hall-of-famer) and one big-time college player. The lesson: when a player shows that much potential early in his High School career, there’s a good chance he’s going to make it.

But I’m not so sure about Mayo.

Something about Mayo’s story , from the whole “five high schools in four years” to his deciding to go to USC despite not being recruited by them (I highly recommend you read this article) in order to market himself doesn’t sound right to me. He already has a track record of moving on whenever things get a little tough for him (changing high schools over spats with coaches regarding discipline and his teammates) and of getting by based on his talent and name recognition (he sent some guy to Tim Floyd’s office to tell him that he’d go to USC). Clearly he’s a slick operator who knows how to play “the game” of selling himself and knows how to say and do the right things when it’s best for his image, but is he in it to win games for his team or for himself? Needless to say, I don’t trust the guy. There’s something about his story that screams “bad news”.

And then there’s the fact that his game this past season was nothing special.

His IPM does not stand out (0.773), and his ratios suggest that he is pretty average athletically. He shot 44% and didn’t really stand out in any other statistical category, except for averaging a very respectable 1.5 steals per game.

On the court, I thought I was watching Larry Hughes , constant gambling. He’s definitely not enough of a ball handler to play point guard, but Mayo got a lot of credit for his spectacular dishes. However he forced way too many passes, averaging 3.5 turnovers per game. In OJ Mayo, I saw a guy who isn’t all that instinctive a player, just a really good athlete who seems to decide before each possession starts what he’s going to do , to drive, pull up or try a spectacular pass. It’s sort of like when Sammy Sosa was in his prime , just guess what pitch is coming and swing as hard as you can at it.

Clearly OJ Mayo is a hard guy to figure out, but I think the numbers tell the real truth about him , he’s an average player in a flashy package, and it’s hard to tell if he really wants to work hard enough to become great.

Where he will be drafted: Top eight.
Best teams for him: A major market where the better he plays on the court, the more off-court rewards come to him. New York, Chicago, Miami.
Worst teams for him: A major market where the off-court distractions ruin his focus. New York, Chicago, Miami.

Jerryd Bayless, Arizona (20, 6′3, 199, Ranked #64): Much like Gordon, Jerryd Bayless has two saving graces in his game: a devastating first step, and surprisingly good hops. But I just don’t see that all adding up to a great player in this case.

I can’t stand these “point guards who don’t really play the point” guys. A player like Bayless is clearly too short to play shooting guard at the NBA level and doesn’t have much of a team leader rep, so he’s going to have to be a truly exceptional athlete to make a go of it.

But Bayless’ college numbers suggest that he might not be the athlete he is advertised as. His IPM of 0.773 is pretty poor, and given that Bayless was an exceptional scorer this season shows that his game is very one-dimensional. Under three rebounds per game, only 29 steals, and just three blocks this season makes him seem like a player who doesn’t do much without the ball in his hands.

The track record of these sort of “big, scoring point guards” is really poor. Reece Gaines or Marcus Banks, anyone? How about Acie Law? Unless they can become a game-controlling point guard like Chauncey Billups then it’s usually a short stay in the league for them, but it took Billups four teams and six years to figure it out.

Most mock drafts I have seen show Bayless as the #3 pick, and I’m sure there is something about him that I am missing , but I know that there are plenty of players I would take before him.

One thing that is interesting is that Bayless’ numbers were almost identical to Ramon Sessions’ final season at Nevada: an IPM of about 0.78, 29 steals, about 45.5% shooting. Sessions got a few more assists and turned it over a little less (30 more assists and 4 fewer TO’s in 4 more games) than Bayless. Sessions was a fantastic pick but I wouldn’t use a top 10 pick on him, and certainly not on someone similar who was a little worse in college.

Where he will be drafted: Top ten.
Best teams for him: A team that needs backcourt scoring and has a big backcourt defender to pair him with. Charlotte, Sacramento, LA Clippers.
Worst teams for him: A team with an established, undersized backcourt or scorers already in place. Chicago, Seattle, New York.

And now I would like to present my list of the top 86 prospects for this season’s NBA Draft – with one name edited out. My supersleeper, the number three prospect, has been cut out, to be revealed tomorrow.

I write the headlines, I get to throw in as much hyperbole as I want.

Since the good teams are busy in the playoffs, I decided that now is the time to help the Bucks get a jump on preparing for the draft. They need to get an edge somehow , and I’ve got some help for them right here.

I have spent a couple of months creating an IPM-based method of ranking NBA Draft prospects. While you can’t do all of your scouting with a calculator, I feel that the method I have created has done a great job over the past few seasons of pinpointing certain characteristics that often indicate which players have a better chance for NBA success than others. When my rankings are compared to the actual results of the last several drafts, they stack up very well. Basically, my method does a similar job of predicting who should go at the top of the draft (my method will usually weed out the one or two players who were taken real high and were busts, but will sometimes replace them with similar busts). My method, however, does a much better job of mining the players who everyone now thinks were late-first round or second round steals — while my analysis shows that most of those “steals” should have been first round picks in the first place based on what they did in college!

A detailed explanation of the methodology for my rankings is available here, but to sum it up, it ranks players by several categories which I feel are important (IPM, rebounding, and a couple of ratios that show how well rounded a player is) and adds in adjustment for things like height, weight, age, schedule strength and shooting ability (since most players shoot a lower percentage at the pro level than in college, bad college shooters tend to be even worse pro shooters). An explanation of what IPM is can be found here, and IPM rankings for all NBA players this past season is here.

The results were very interesting, and illustrated a serious flaw in the thought processes of most general managers. After the first few picks, when the “cream of the crop” is gone, GM’s tend to keep looking for players with incredible talent who might be a future superstar. However, the truth is that the guys who really have “superstar” in them are most likely gone by the fifth or sixth pick , after that, you are gambling on players with unproven talent who have something holding them back , either their heads or that they don’t really have all that much talent. GM’s are better off taking players who were highly productive in college, rather than passing on a good college player because he was an inch too short or 10 pounds too light. Sometimes a GM will strike gold in the second round by reaching for a player, but much more often they will strike out.

Another concept that I don’t see many GM’s using is the theory that they should use late first round and second round picks to try and get players who can help them immediately. Often this means grabbing older college players (22 and 23 year olds) who may be more mature. They might not have the ceiling of a younger guy, but they should be able to step in and become an inexpensive, productive bench player immediately. Because of this theory I also ranked players without considering their age, so that once the top talent is gone a GM might consider taking an older player who is more likely to help the team immediately. One example of this is Brandon Roy in 2006 , he ranked as the #6 prospect overall, but #2 without considering his age. He was the most likely player to be good immediately , and what do you know, he won the rookie of the year award and was an all-star one year later. One caveat about this, though , beware of older players from small schools. They usually were beating up on sub-par players who were much younger than them, so their numbers usually lie about their prospects.

I did not create rankings for high school players (so when I refer to someone as the #1 prospect in 2003, LeBron James doesn’t count). I also couldn’t get complete numbers for foreign players before the last couple of years, so I ignored them until the 2006 calculations. I am publishing the lists of my rankings going back to 2002, and also a comparison of how each years’ first round actually went and how it should have gone according to my rankings. If a team drafted a high school player or a foreign player for whom I had no ranking, I assumed that player was still drafted at that spot and didn’t assign a new player.

I tested my rankings against the last six draft seasons, and this is how it stacked up:

2002: Full Prospect Rankings available here; First round of the draft (actual picks compared to my rankings) available here.

What worked: This was a strange draft that saw the eventual three best NBA players drafted at #10 (Caron Butler), #23 (Tayshaun Prince) and in the second round (Carlos Boozer). These were three highly productive college players who slid in the draft because of concerns about their past, weight, and size. In the eyes of GM’s, these concerns obscured the fact that these were really good players. My rankings had Boozer, Butler and Prince as the #6, #7 and #8 prospects. My rankings also screamed “bust” about the Bucks’ selection, Marcus Haislip, as he clearly was the type of guy who looked great in a uniform but didn’t produce on the court (#32 prospect).

What didn’t work: My rankings lowered the biggest busts of the top 13 picks (Dajuan Wagner, Haislip) but replaced them with two equally big busts (Curtis Borchardt and Ryan Humphrey). The bust rate for centers like Borchardt , big and slow , is immensely high, while Humphrey was a smaller, less athletic version of Tayshaun Prince who put up great numbers at Notre Dame.

2003: Full Prospect Rankings available here; First round of the draft comparison available here.

What worked: This was a very good draft that was difficult to im prove on but my rankings did a great job of it. There were no busts among the top six college players taken, and my rankings look the same, except for dropping Kirk Hinrich a little. However, in the actual draft there were two huge steals late in the round , David West at #18 and Josh Howard at #29. My rankings loved both players, labeling Howard as the #5 prospect and West #8. Additionally, without considering age, they tied as the #2 prospect overall (behind Carmelo Anthony, and not counting high schooler LeBron James). The three second round steals; Kyle Korver, Steve Blake, and Mo Williams all landed squarely in the middle of my first round, as they should have been considered the #14, #15 and #16 prospects.

What didn’t work: My rankings moved Marcus Banks up a bit, slotting him as the #5 prospect (tied with Josh Howard).

2004: Full Prospect Rankings available here; First round of the draft comparison available here.

What worked: I wound up with Devin Harris ranked as a co-#1 with Emeka Okafor (Dwight Howard was not rated), which 4 years later looks pretty good , I’d rather have Harris then Ben Gordon right now. Overall, this was not the best draft for my system, but it moved up Kevin Martin from #26 to #20 and moved Chris Duhon and Trevor Ariza into the first round. It also showed that Rafael Araujo should never have been a first round pick.

What didn’t work: Since my system loves productive college players, it moved Jameer Nelson ahead of players like Luol Deng and Andre Iguodala (and Delonte West ahead of Iguodala). It also moved head-case Kris Humphries into the top 5.

2005: Full Prospect Rankings available here; First round of the draft comparison available here.

What worked: I had Chris Paul ahead of Bogut, but only by a slim margin. Danny Granger was ranked #3, which looking back was almost the right call (besides Paul, Bogut , Deron Williams, and David Lee, Granger is most desirable player from that draft). Charlie Villanueva ranked #4, which was interesting because the pick was roundly panned at the time but he still wound up as runner up for rookie of the year. David Lee was the steal of the draft at #30 this season, but my rankings say he should have been the #22 pick instead. Marvin Williams was only the #10 prospect.

What didn’t work: I dropped bust Ike Diogu to the #29 pick but replaced him with bust Brandon Bass at #9.

2006: Full Prospect Rankings available here; First round of the draft comparison available here.

What worked: In the first year that I included rankings for college players, I show Andrea Bargnani to be unworthy of the #1 pick (should have gone #21). Bargnani’s biggest problem here has been his rebounding, and while he was a big-time rebounder in Italy, Euro stats proved that the rest of his game was not very well rounded (which means big trouble when his rebounding talent failed to come across the Atlantic with him). My rankings also show that Rudy Gay should not have slid out of the top 3, that Paul Milsap and Rajon Rondo should have been top-10 picks, that Shelden Williams at #5 was idiotic, that JJ Redick was not a top-15 player, and that Adam Morrison was not even close to being worth the #3 pick , he shouldn’t have been a first rounder.

What didn’t work: Tyrus Thomas and Ronnie Brewer were the top two prospects, but because of Thomas’ head and Brewer’s injury history (he cannot fully extend his left arm due to a childhood injury) means that both of them might fall short. Also, I had Cedric Simmons as the #4 prospect. Come on, numbers, what is wrong with you?

2007: Full Prospect Rankings available here; First round of the draft comparison available here.

What worked: My rankings were pretty consistent with the actual draft, so it’s too early to say that my numbers did anything great , but at least they agreed with the top 4 picks. My rankings identified Ramon Sessions as a steal late in the second round , he should have been a first round pick. I also had Yi Jianlian as the #14 pick, for better or worse.

What didn’t work: Josh McRoberts showed up as the #10 prospect, despite obviously being only worth a second round pick (classic bust: big, slow center). The reason he ranked so high was that he racked up 114 assists in his final season at Duke (second on the team) since all they do is kick the ball out for 3-pointers. That screams “fluke” but my calculator doesn’t know that (Mc Roberts racked up 2 assists in 8 games for Portland). The numbers also listed Thaddeus Young as the #26 pick, which was way too low for him.

So that’s how my rankings have done for past seasons. What about this season?

I’m not quite ready to publicize my prospect list just yet, because there is a lot to write about. For starters, half of the top-8 prospects in all the mock drafts just scream “bust” to me. Secondly, I’ve got a supersleeper in mind , a guy who was fantastically productive in college, ranks as my #3 prospect overall, and is projected in most drafts to be a late first round or even a second round pick. These are all things that I want to talk about before letting the whole list loose.

But I do want to talk about the top guys right now , the #1, #2 and #4 prospects in the draft this season:

1: Michael Beasley, Kansas State (PF, 19, 6′9, 235, Ranked #1): No matter what Bobby Knight thinks, “B-Easy” delivered the goods night in and night out for K-State. Knight made some comments on ESPN about how he likes Tyler Hansbrough more than Beasley because the UNC player commits himself to being his best every night and Knight is “not sure that Beasley does the same thing.” Well, according to IPM, Beasley does try all the time , he has the best IPM and best rebound rate of all of this season’s likely draftees.

Beyond scoring and rebounding, Beasley’s game is a little one-dimensional. He doesn’t get that many steals or blocks compared to his turnover rate, but that’s not necessarily a reason for concern , His numbers in this respect are similar to players like Carlos Boozer and Amare Stoudemire, players whom Beasley is supposed to be similar to.

That said, Beasley has a nice “unstoppability” about him and is this draft’s most sure thing. He will be a good player for a long time. But my question about him is: since his dominant skill is one that is fairly easy to replace from any number of other players (scoring), is he destined to be one of those “good player on bad teams” guys? Basically, to carry a team with your scoring ability you have to be a pretty unique talent. Is Beasely really that good? It’s going to take several years and several million dollars to find out.

Where he should be drafted: Top Three.
Best teams for him: One that needs frontcourt scoring and a general talent upgrade. Miami, Minnesota, Charlotte.
Worst teams for him: One with an established frontcourt or a young scorer already in place. Seattle, New York.

2: Kevin Love, UCLA (PF, 20 Years Old, 6′10, 271, Prospect Rank: #2): When I first saw Love play, I thought: “This guy is huge! This guy is really slow!” I felt that he would have a hard time handling NBA athletes and no matter what sort of intangibles he brings it wouldn’t matter because he would always be a step slow. But after seeing what has happened to the Phoenix Suns with Shaquille O’Neal, I have changed my tune. The Suns ended the season playing at a faster pace and with an even more efficient offense than pre-Shaq. This shows that any team can handle having one slow widebody if he’s the sort of guy who is always in the right place at the right time, sucks up rebounds, and starts fast breaks. That sums up Kevin Love’s game perfectly.

Love has been alternately described by Brent Musberger and others as “the best outlet passer since Wes Unseld”, “the best outlet passer since Bill Walton”, and “the best outlet passer ever.” Apparently, Love can really pass. He can also really shoot (56%) and really rebound (third best per-minute rate among draft prospects this season).

There is one thing disconcerting about him , doesn’t a 19 year old guy carrying 270 pounds sound a little extreme? He’s not going to get any smaller , how big will he be five years from now? Will stamina be a problem? His weight is a major question , the only players similar to his size in the last few drafts were Mike Sweetney (who ate his way out of the league) and Sean May (who has been effective when healthy but never healthy), but Love was so productive at UCLA that his weight only drops him a little in my rankings. If he weighed under 260 he would be the #1 prospect.

That one issue aside, I foresee a very strong career for Love, as Zach Randolph has proven that a ground-bound big man can be a very efficient scorer and rebounder. Love’s game is ten times more well-rounded than Randolph’s, and I can see Love making all-star teams for years by countering his lack of athleticism by using his humongous ass to push players out of his way.

Where he should be drafted: Top three (but he won’t be).
Best (lottery) teams for him: Anyone that wants a good player. Memphis, Miami “¦ almost everyone.
Worst teams for him: Teams that already have dirty-work power forwards. New York, Chicago.

3: Derrick Rose, Memphis (PG, 20, 6′3, 190, Ranked #4): You hear “Jason Kidd with a jump shot” thrown around about way too many players, but this guy might be able to fill the bill. The thing that strikes me the most about Rose isn’t so much his offensive skill , lots of guys look like dynamite scorers when they are always the best athlete on the court , but the way he rebounds. He has a way of seemingly jumping for a rebound and to be heading up the court before he even lands. It’s something I’ve only seen elsewhere in Jason Kidd.

Rose gets knocked by some for his fairly low assist numbers at Memphis, but I think he should get a pass on that. Not only are assists fairly hard to come by in the college game, but the Memphis dribble-drive motion offense is not assist-friendly at all. It depends on spacing the floor and exploiting mismatches with one-on-one drives. In fact, to run the offense correctly the floor is supposed to always be spread to such an extreme that nobody ever sets a screen. Needless to say, there aren’t many assist opportunities from pick and rolls or drive-and-dish plays.

As for the rest of his game, Rose picked up about a steal per game and was a solid shooter, although his 67% free throw shooting is a little lower than one would like (one also wonders exactly how much they coached free throw shooting at Memphis).

Rose fits the prototype of my idea of a great point guard , big, fast and acrobatic. It will take a couple of years for him to blossom in the NBA , except for Chris Paul, it always takes time for point guards. But the team that gets him will eventually reap major rewards.

If I was John Hammond then Derrick Rose would be number one on my draft board.

Where he should be drafted: Top three.
Best teams for him: One that can afford to wait a couple of years for him to blossom. Milwaukee, New York.
Worst teams for him: One with a young point guard in place or who wants to try to rebuild quickly. Memphis, Miami.

It’s a strange draft this season as there are several other high-profile players available at the top of most people’s draft boards, but when you look closely at them they all have major red flags about them. In fact, my rankings claim that some of the guys proposed as top-8 selections shouldn’t even be drafted at all.

Up next: The Rest of the Top-8 Prospects: 5 Potential Busts.