NFL Divisional Round Preview

It's been awhile since I've posted on this blog but I want to give a preview of this weekend's NFL playoff games, with regards to the four quarterback matchups.
For this preview, I am using a statistic called Adjusted Yards per Attempt (AYPA), which is simply (Pass Yards + Pass TD*10 - Interceptions *45)/Attempts).

This doesn't factor in rushing or sacks, nor does it factor in strength of teammates, but it is a nice summary statistic that is less arbitrary than the NFL's quarterback rating. I also will look beyond regular season numbers and see which quarterbacks have historically raised or lowered their games in the playoffs.

Here is a rough guideline of how to interpret the AYPA numbers:

5 - mediocre
6 - average
6.5 - above-average
7 - Pro Bowl
7.5 - MVP

The matchups:

Baltimore at Tennessee

Joe Flacco - 2008: 6.0 AYPA (rookie)
Kerry Collins - 2008: 6.0 AYPA; Career: 5.5 AYPA; Postseason: 4.75 AYPA

This matchup is difficult to assess since Flacco is a rookie. Collins has had the worst career of any of the quarterbacks still alive in the postseason, but he still may have the advantage in this matchup due to Flacco's inexperience. It is worth noting that despite Collins' mediocre career numbers, he gets worse in the playoffs. Still, I think the Titans will prevail here.

San Diego at Pittsburgh

Ben Roethlisberger - 2008: 6.0 AYPA; Career: 6.76 AYPA; Postseason: 6.20 AYPA
Philip Rivers - 2008: 8.1 AYPA; Career: 6.90 AYPA, Postseason: 6.39 AYPA

Looking at career regular season and playoff numbers, Rivers looks slightly better overall. Both have declined in the playoffs, but both are still strong playoff performers, and some decline is to be expected due to the higher quality of defenses. Based on 2008 numbers, however, Rivers crushes Roethlisberger. Rivers led the NFL in AYPA by a wide margin, and he makes the Chargers an extremely dangerous team despite their 8-8 regular season record. I picked the Steelers to win the Super Bowl in part because of Roethlisberger's past successes. Looking at these numbers, though, I am worried that this may be a mismatch in favor of Rivers. Still, I lean towards the Steelers since they have a superior defense and home field advantage, but it may be a closer game than expected.

Arizona at Carolina

Kurt Warner - 2008: 7.1 AYPA; Career: 7.11 AYPA; Postseason: 7.22 AYPA
Jake Delhomme - 2008: 7.0 AYPA; Career: 6.41 AYPA; Postseason: 7.95 AYPA

Surprisingly, this game pits the two quarterbacks with the gaudiest playoff statistics. Although I've always thought of Warner as a system quarterback, he matched his career numbers this season, and he has actually performed quite well in the playoffs, leading the Rams to the Super Bowl twice and winning once. Delhomme, for his part, transforms into a superstar in the playoffs. Apart from a 3-interception performance against Seattle in 2006, he has been scintillating in the postseason, including 323 yards and 3 TDs against the Patriots in the Super Bowl. It's only a 7 game sample size, so perhaps Delhomme is not really as good as his numbers. But given that he had a strong regular season this year, he may well prove to be the quarterback that can lead the Panthers to a Super Bowl victory.

Philadelphia at NY Giants

Donovan McNabb - 2008: 6.4 AYPA; Career: 6.32 AYPA; Postseason: 5.60 AYPA
Eli Manning - 2008: 6.3 AYPA; Career: 5.37 AYPA; Postseason: 6.01 AYPA

This is a matchup that shows why it is important to look at playoff numbers and not just regular season numbers. McNabb has been a strong regular season performer throughout his career and his 6.32 figure is very good given the number of seasons he has played. Manning's career figures are artificially lowered due to his awful rookie season, but even his best season is an average season for McNabb. In the playoffs, however, McNabb gets worse while Manning gets better. Although Manning is not and will never be a superstar, he proved last year that he is an elite game manager who can raise his game in the playoffs. Thus, I look for Manning's cool head to win this one for the Giants, although we will see if he can match Delhomme in the NFC Championship Game.

The NBA's Top 10 Small Forwards

As in the previous posts, three-year averages of adjusted plus-minus ratings follow:

1. LeBron James, +13.70
2. Ron Artest, +7.79
3. Andrei Kirilenko, +6.36
4. Paul Pierce, +6.17
5. Luol Deng, +5.88
6. Chuck Hayes, +5.75
7. Corey Maggette, +4.72
8. Peja Stojakovic, +4.66
9. Shane Battier, +4.06
10. Gerald Wallace, +3.45

Other Notables: Hedo Turkoglu (+2.78), Josh Howard (+2.49), Rashard Lewis (+1.08), Tayshaun Prince (+0.88), Caron Butler (-0.38), Bruce Bowen (-0.64), Carmelo Anthony (-1.50), Richard Jefferson (-2.18)

LeBron is #1 with a bullet, and in fact, ranks #1 among all NBA players over the last 3 seasons, and yes, he ranks ahead of Kobe. LeBron is the main reason I have cringed every time I have heard a commentator proclaim Kobe to be the best basketball player on Earth. I suspect that this sentiment has something to do with Kobe's veteran status as well as the fact that Kobe, at this point in his career, is probably more skilled on the whole. However, the reason I think that LeBron is possibly superior and at least an equal (and why Kobe falls short compared to Jordan as well) is sheer physical skill. LeBron is an absolutely dominant inside player - something that Kobe cannot match. Kobe is a great athlete, but LeBron is a freakish athlete. Even with his questionable jumper, LeBron scores at the same rate and efficiency as Kobe due to his unquestioned ability to get to the basket.

OK - enough LeBron worshipping. From this ranking, Houston is in a great position adding Artest to their already loaded roster. They are jammed at forward and Artest is another player who can't stay healthy, but at the very least they now have 63-win kind of upside (although there are a lot of ifs to make that happen). Kirilenko ranks so high primarily due to an insane 2006 rating - in truth, he was probably one of the top 10 players in the league between 2002 and 2006, but he is past his prime today, although still a valuable asset. I do enjoy that touted role players like Chuck Hayes and Shane Battier make the top 10 - Hayes is probably overrated by this metric, but Battier's defensive contributions are strong enough that I don't think #9 is an absurd placement.

As a Bulls fan it does my heart good to see Luol Deng come in at #5 - even with an off year last year, he was still much more valuable to the team than Hinrich or Gordon. In my opinion, the Bulls should rebuild around Rose, Deng, Joakim Noah, and Tyrus Thomas - with everyone else being expendable. Ben Gordon is a nice piece to have on offense but his defensive liabilities make the kind of contract he's asking for an unwise investment.

To address the lower ranking star players - it is clear to me at this point that Carmelo Anthony and Richard Jefferson, to a lesser extent, are not contributing to wins in a manner suggested by their statistics. Both, it seems, have serious defensive issues and have consistently low ratings over a 3-year period, suggesting that these results are no fluke. The Nets were not unwise to get rid of Jefferson whereas the Nuggets should seriously consider trading Carmelo or reducing his minutes to inspire him to play better defense. As for some others, Bruce Bowen's reputation dates from a few years ago - he is old now and not as valuable as he once was. Tayshaun Prince is hurt by a questionably low 2006 rating - he probably is better than this analysis indicates. Caron Butler never really came into his own until this season - in the past, he has been another weak defensive player. Stay tuned for my ranking of power forwards!

The NBA's Top 10 Shooting Guards

More 3-year adjusted plus minus rankings here, this time for shooting guards. I should note that the best way to do this would be a regression over 3 years of data rather than averaging years. I'm just waiting for the good people at Basketball Value to provide more along these lines.

1. Kobe Bryant, +11.55
2. Manu Ginobili, +9.46
3. Dwyane Wade, +7.74
4. Vince Carter, +6.34
5. Andre Iguodala, +6.16
6. Jason Richardson, +4.79
7. Michael Redd, +4.18
8. Ray Allen, +3.79
9. Tracy McGrady, +3.73
10. Kirk Snyder, +3.59

Other notables: Joe Johnson (+2.59), Jamal Crawford (+2.22), Brandon Roy (-1.01 - only 2 years though), Ben Gordon (-2.27), Kevin Martin (-2.68), Jerry Stackhouse (-3.64), Richard Hamilton (-7.41)

On the whole, I think there are fewer surprises here than on the PG list. Based on adjusted plus-minus, Kobe lives up to the hype, although as we will see with the later positional rankings, it is hardly as obvious that he is the best player on the planet as the media likes to pretend. Noticeably, Manu Ginobili ranks as a truly great player by this metric, which I think he deserves. It does surprise me that Andre Iguodala ranks in the top 5 - I suspect he has some extra value due to his defense whereas players like Michael Redd and Ray Allen give up a lot on defense. Tracy McGrady ranks a surprising 9th, well behind his former Toronto teammate Vince Carter, but his rating has decreased every year between 2006 and 2008, suggesting that his injuries are taking a toll on his production. As for Kirk Snyder ranking 10th, I suspect that it is a fluke since he simply hasn't played much in 3 years but it seems like he is definitely worth signing to a cheap contract to prove whether or not his high ranking is real.

There aren't a whole lot of star SGs who rank poorly in this metric and the ones who do seem fairly logical. Brandon Roy is probably just a victim of his youth - young players usually don't make the kind of contributions picked up by plus-minus. Ben Gordon and Kevin Martin are talented offensive players who get toasted on defense. I'm not sure why Stackhouse ranks so low, but Rip Hamilton's rating is artificially deflated due to a 2006 season where the Pistons' starting five played a huge load of minutes together, as explained by David Lewin here. Even so, Hamilton rated as a negative player in both 2007 and 2008, a quite surprising result suggesting that the Pistons' success is due to the other members of its starting five.

The NBA's Top 10 Point Guards

Presented below are three-year averages of adjusted plus-minus for the NBA's point guards. I rank the top 10 then mention some other notable names that didn't make the Top 10.

1. Steve Nash, +8.52
2. Baron Davis, +7.32
3. Jason Kidd, +7.25
4. Allen Iverson, +5.51
5. Chris Paul, +4.89
6. Jason Terry, +4.64
7. Nate Robinson, +4.00
8. Chauncey Billups, +3.85
9. Devin Harris, +3.17
10. Tony Allen, +2.51

Other Notables: Rajon Rondo, +4.00 (not included due to only 2 years in the league), Tony Parker, +1.86, Monta Ellis, +1.83, Andre Miller, +0.58, Deron Williams, -0.67, Mo Williams, -1.36, Kirk Hinrich, -2.11, TJ Ford, -2.53, Jose Calderon, -3.49, Mike Bibby, -3.58

I believe that this list shows both the advantages and pitfalls of adjusted plus-minus. There can be no doubt that Nash, Davis and Kidd have been a cut above the rest of the NBA's point guards, posting consistently high numbers over the last 3 seasons. Yet the relatively low rating of players like Chris Paul, Tony Parker, and Deron Williams might arouse skepticism. Personally, I suspect that Paul's rating should be somewhat higher, but looking at the breakdowns into offense and defense handily provided at countthebasket, it is my guess that although Paul and Nash are probably the two best offensive point guards in the game, Paul's defense is even more of a liability than Nash's and thus keeps him from joining the top 3 (for now, at least).

As for some other ratings of note, adjusted plus-minus pinpoints the Spurs' success as being primarily dependent on Duncan and Ginobili - Parker has been a winning player, but not a great one. Deron Williams' three-year average is low because of a poor rookie season; nonetheless, his rating of +2.0 over the last 2 years is still outside of the top 10 - we will have to see if this trend continues as he matures. Pretty much every other star PG who rates as a losing player (Williams, Ford, Calderon, Bibby) are there due to their defensive liabilities. From this analysis, the offensive advantages enjoyed by the Raptors from employing both Ford and Calderon were more than offset by the two getting lit up on defense.

What have we learned from this set of ratings? Point guard is the top offensive position but also the weakest defensive position in the NBA. Thanks to countthebasket.com, we can see the splits for each player (for 2008, at least). Some point guards really get killed on defense and this makes them much less valuable than their box score statistics would indicate. In the case of Steve Nash, his defense doesn't sink his rating like it does Chris Paul's but it does lower it enough that he probably wasn't the MVP in 2005 or 2006 although he was arguably the top offensive player in the league. The greatest value of adjusted plus-minus is what it tells us about individual defense, and when it shows consistent ratings over a multi-year period. Its downside of course, it its high standard errors but I believe that presenting 3-year ratings like this offsets a lot of that bias.

Baron Davis and the Clippers

With the NBA off-season now in full swing, I thought it a good time to apply a relatively new tool to the purpose of evaluating off-season transactions. That tool is adjusted plus-minus! For those not in the know, I recommend starting here and here for the most recent adjusted plus-minus data and to explain a little about what it is. For those who don't want to click, I will give a brief summary.

The plus-minus statistic by itself measures a very simple, yet enlightening phenomenon. If the Cavs outscore the Celtics by 8 points when LeBron James is on the court but are outscored by 16 points when he is off the court, LeBron gets a plus-minus of +24, reflecting the team's vastly superior performance when he is on the court. The problem is that if LeBron's teammates are poor, his plus-minus will be higher than if he played on a stronger team. Another problem is that a player who is on the court at the same time as LeBron might take undue credit for what were LeBron's positive contributions. What adjusted plus-minus does is to incorporate a multiple regression analysis that accounts for the quality of a player's teammates in computing plus-minus. Although subject to some high standard errors, using two or more seasons' worth of data gives a fairly accurate estimate of the values of each player in the NBA.

What a tool like adjusted plus-minus can allow us to do most readily is to see exactly how a move like the Clippers' signing of Baron Davis can impact the team's win-loss total. Below is a projected lineup for next year's Clippers team. This is obviously simplified, using just nine players, but should work to give us a rough estimate. Career minutes per game were used for each player when possible to project playing time, although they had to be adjusted in some cases to reflect the distribution of talent on the team. For adjusted plus-minus, I included each player's adjusted plus-minus from the previous 3 seasons, but weighted it towards the most recent season.


Baron Davis 35.5 mpg, +7.02
Cuttino Mobley 37.0 mpg, -1.42
Al Thornton 27.3 mpg, -4.43
Elton Brand 38.3 mpg, +5.91
Chris Kaman 29.1 mpg, -2.00

Tim Thomas 21.7 mpg, -0.33
Brevin Knight 16.3 mpg, +1.18
Quinton Ross 16.1 mpg, -2.33
Eric Gordon 18.7 mpg, -2.85

Adding up each player's scores and weighting for minutes played, the Clippers' 08-09 scoring margin (per 100 possessions) projects to be 3.45, which would make them about a 50 win team. Obviously, this would be a big year for the Clippers, although it would not make them a championship contender. Still, I estimate that the addition of Davis and the return of a healthy Brand should add about 9.9 points to the team's scoring margin, turning them from one of the weaker teams in the league into a legitimate playoff team.

There is of course uncertainty in this estimate. Baron Davis may not post the same high rating for a new team. Elton Brand may not be as good as he was before his injury. The estimates for Al Thornton and Eric Gordon are pretty much a shot in the dark. I gave Gordon the average rookie rating for the 2007 draft class of -2.85. Thornton's rating as a rookie was -5.57 but I adjusted it slightly upwards to account for second-year improvement. Still, without extensive study, it is hard to know how to expect Thornton's rating to change in year two. If he were to become even a league-average player, it could propel the Clippers to 55 wins or more. And of course, the Clippers' roster may change. For one, I am assuming here that they don't resign Corey Maggette. Still, a 50 win projection seems like a decent ballpark estimate for a team led by two very strong players in Baron Davis and Elton Brand, and this is where this kind of analysis can come in handy.

As for the Warriors, I won't try to project their roster for next year, as it seems certain that they will try to retool through free agency, perhaps adding a point guard, or perhaps trading away veteran talent to begin rebuilding. That said, according to adjusted plus-minus, Baron Davis added about 5.1 points to the team's scoring margin in 2008, meaning that without him, they could expect to fall from 48 to about 37 wins. The playoff window seems to have passed for Golden State, and they will have to think hard about their moves going forward.

Draft Grades 2008

In the spirit of NBA Draft coverage everywhere, I am pleased to unveil our first-ever set of draft grades for the 2008 NBA Draft. Some might say that it is pointless to dole out marks when there is a great deal of uncertainty as to how good each prospect will be. To that, I respond that our business here is projection, and I at least (although not wanting to speak for Hugh) have a big enough ego to think that I am right. Furthermore, we can already evaluate to some extent how well each team drafted for their present and future needs.

Atlanta Hawks:
Grade: N/A
Picks: none

Boston Celtics:
Grade: B
Picks: J.R. Giddens, Bill Walker, Semih Erden

No home runs for the Celtics with the last pick in Round 1, but they picked up some nice athletic talent in Giddens and Walker. I'm not high on Giddens with a first-round pick, but the Celtics made up for it by grabbing Walker in the second-round, who has the potential to be very good if he can stay healthy. Walker is a mid to late first-round pick on talent, and thus is a steal at 47.

Charlotte Bobcats:
Grade: D
Picks: D.J. Augustin, Alexis Ajinca, Kyle Weaver

Yeah a harsh grade but I'm not a fan of the way they spent their picks. After all, when Hugh originally selected Augustin for the Bobcats in our mock draft, it was because he forgot that they already have a 23 year old talented point guard. Apparently, so did Michael Jordan. Will Augustin be better than Felton? Certainly not right away, and Felton is still young enough to get better himself (although it should be noted he has not really improved since his rookie year). Looking at their college numbers, Augustin scored more, but Felton was the better passer, the better rebounder, and also got more steals. The Bobcats have to worry that they just drafted a backup PG with the #9 pick, considering that they don't really need a replacement point. The Ajinca pick is a flyer, but it should be noted that he failed to dominate an inferior European league, so I am not optimistic about his future.

Chicago Bulls:
Grade: A-
Picks: Derrick Rose, Omer Asik

I'd give an A, but I continue to hold onto the idea that Beasley is the superior prospect to Rose. I like Rose very much, but we've heard ad nauseam about his superior athleticism without questioning what skills that will translate into. Indications are that he is a good but not great passer meaning he will top off at about 8 assists per game. To be a true franchise superstar, he will have to develop a jump shot and turn into a 25+ points per game scorer. It is not out of the question, but not a lock either as his scoring abilities are still somewhat unproven. I have said it before, but he seems most likely to develop into a 20 ppg, 8 apg player which would make him an All-Star but not a superstar.
As for the Asik pick, I love it. According to John Hollinger, Asik projects to average 12.2 points and 13.5 rebounds per 40, with a PER of 15.23. Although he won't come over for a few years, he ought to be a useful role player when he does.

Cleveland Cavaliers:
Grade: B
Picks: J.J. Hickson, Darnell Jackson, Sasha Kaun

Overall, a solid draft for the Cavs. J.J. Hickson is a player with upside at #19, and it's never a bad idea to mine the roster of a dominant NCAA team like Kansas. In particular, Darnell Jackson is a potential 2nd-round steal with a very nice Hollinger projection.

Dallas Mavericks:
Grade: C
Picks: Shan Foster

I'm not a big fan of Foster, but honestly, with only the #51 pick in the draft, you can't expect to get much. Historically, only players drafted in the first half of the second round have made an impact, apart from a few foreign unknowns like Manu Ginobili.

Denver Nuggets:
Grade: D
Picks: Sonny Weems

Perhaps a D is harsh when they only made one pick, yet there's nothing in Weems' college numbers to indicate that he'll be useful, and in my opinion, a much more intriguing shooting guard in Chris Douglas-Roberts was still on the board.

Detroit Pistons:
Grade: B-
Picks: Walter Sharpe, Trent Plaisted, Deron Washington

I can't fault the Pistons too much for rolling the dice with Sharpe, considering it was a 2nd-round pick, but in a fairly deep draft, there were still some players left on the board who I think will ultimately make more of an impact. Plaisted seems like a stiff big man, and Washington will probably never make the team.

Golden State Warriors:
Grade: A-
Picks: Anthony Randolph, Richard Hendrix

If I had to guess, I'd say that Randolph won't live up to his potential, but despite his inefficiency, it was still impressive that he played a prominent role in scoring and rebounding as a freshman. At #14, the Warriors were rightfully willing to take the risk. They get an A- from me for managing to get Hendrix late in the second round - honestly, he could be as good as Marreese Speights or Darrell Arthur, either of whom the Warriors could have taken instead of Randolph, and is thus a tremendous value pick at #49.

Houston Rockets:
Grade: A-
Picks: Donte Greene, Joey Dorsey, Maarty Leunen

I definitely like the picks they got late. Greene, as a young, jump-shooting forward, has the potential to be quite good, and carries almost no risk with a late first-round pick. Dorsey's contributions in the NBA will be limited due to his lack of offense, but I am high on him as a second-rounder, in part because of GM Daryl Morey's quite convincing rationale. Leunen is a solid late second-round prospect who was incredibly efficient at Oregon. All in all, the Rockets did a nice job of bolstering their already impressive depth.

Indiana Pacers:
Grade: C+
Picks: Brandon Rush, Roy Hibbert

Unlike Chad Ford, I am not a big fan of the Pacers' draft-day moves. The TJ Ford trade is a very good one, yet they then proceeded to trade away a potential All-Star in Jerryd Bayless for two role players (Rush and Jarrett Jack). Yes, a Ford-Bayless backcourt might have been too small on defense, but the Pacers will nonetheless regret this trade if Bayless develops into a 20 ppg scorer in 3-4 years, which he is certainly capable of doing. Rush is a more valuable piece on a better team, where he could spread the floor coming off the bench. Hibbert is a developed player, and has a nice Hollinger projection, but his lack of speed and conditioning will likely consign him to a career off the bench.

Los Angeles Clippers:
Grade: C+
Picks: Eric Gordon, DeAndre Jordan, Mike Taylor

Honestly, it'd be a lower grade if they hadn't stolen DeAndre Jordan in Round 2. Eric Gordon is so one-dimensional that I wonder if he'll be much more than a spot-up shooter at the NBA level. Not to focus too much on Jerryd Bayless, but he seems to me the more intriguing talent, and although not a true point, could certainly play the position. If the Clippers put Gordon at point (and they currently have no one else), their offense will truly struggle.
It is quite amazing that NBA teams have wised up on talented, yet raw center prospects. It is becoming more and more of a guard's league and it is worth reminding that many of the glut of centers who fell into the late first and early second rounds would have been lottery picks five years ago. Nonetheless, it seems to me that teams got too scared of Jordan, who is still very young and showed some talent as a freshman. I had compared him to Sam Dalembert in our mock draft and the comparison holds even better now since Dalembert fell to the end of the first round yet wound up being a useful player.
As for Mike Taylor, he makes a nice story, but he was hardly dominant in the NBDL (PER of 16.3) and his college numbers the year before were pretty awful.

Los Angeles Lakers:
Grade: C
Picks: Joe Crawford

This draft was a non-factor for the Lakers, similar to the Mavericks.

Memphis Grizzlies:
Grade: B-
Picks: O.J. Mayo, Darrell Arthur

Time will tell, but although I think the Grizzlies wound up with two good players in Mayo and Arthur, I'm not sure that it was worth giving up Kevin Love to get Mayo. Mayo might have more upside, but I think Love will at the least be better right away (and quite possibly better in the long-term). Moreover, they gave up Mike Miller, who already may be as good an offensive player as Mayo will be. The Grizzlies get some points for stealing Arthur late in the first, but the Mayo-Love trade looks questionable at the moment.

Miami Heat:
Grade: A
Picks: Michael Beasley, Mario Chalmers

The Heat not only picked up the most talented player in the draft in Beasley, but landed a mid-first round talent in Chalmers in the second. It's hard to imagine that a team that was as athletically dominant in the NCAA as Kansas won't produce any good pros, and I would say that Chalmers and Arthur are the best bets in this regard.

Milwaukee Bucks:
Grade: C
Picks: Joe Alexander, Luc Richard Mbah a Moute

I like Alexander, but the Bucks have run into the same problem as the Bobcats. They just picked up a player who is going to be their backup SF. I like this a little better for the Bucks, since first, I think Alexander is more promising than Augustin, and although Jefferson is better than Felton, he is also a lot older, so perhaps as Jefferson starts to decline, Alexander will be hitting his prime, ready to claim the starting spot. Mbah a Moute will have to be a damn good defender, because he never improved offensively at UCLA, and looked nothing short of useless when I saw him in the NCAA Tournament.

Minnesota Timberwolves:
Grade: A
Picks: Kevin Love, Nikola Pekovic

They may have given away Garnett, but you have to love the Wolves' haul in this draft, although their frontcourt rotation may be a bit overloaded now with Love, Jefferson, and Pekovic (if Pekovic comes over any time soon). The team will be much improved in the short term if Love and Miller can make an immediate impact, and according to Hollinger, Pekovic may be an even better prospect than Love, projecting to average 18.3 points and 12.0 rebounds per 40, with a PER of 17.09 if he played next year. I suspect that Pekovic is not actually that good, as he had very low steal and block totals, and also improved vastly from the year before, but by the time he gets out of his European contract, he ought to make a big splash in the NBA.

New Jersey Nets:
Grade: A-
Picks: Brook Lopez, Ryan Anderson, Chris Douglas-Roberts

I don't think the Nets have any future stars here, but they got strong value at each pick, getting the best big man on the board at #10, a highly productive scoring forward at #21, and a first-team All-American in the second round. A great draft that will bolster their depth and make their roster more enticing for LeBron 2010.

New Orleans Hornets:
Grade: A+
Picks: none

They didn't have any picks, but they did sign Illini alum Shaun Pruitt to a summer league contract!

New York Knicks:
Grade: A-
Picks: Danilo Gallinari

A common misunderstanding in ESPN's draft coverage, and of course one used as evidence in Dick Vitale's annual anti-foreigner rant, was that Gallinari is not ready to play in the NBA and was being drafted on potential only. This is so completely wrong that I was forced to yell helplessly at my TV, even knowing that no one could hear me. As John Hollinger has pointed out, translating stats from the Euroleague is actually more accurate than translating NCAA statistics. Gallinari is not an Alexis Ajinca, who played in a lower-level European league and didn't get much playing time. Despite being just 19, he played 31.6 minutes per game in the second-best league in the world, averaging 14.9 points per game. He posted a quite respectable PER of 19.6. If anything, he is more ready to contribute right away than the more touted NCAA freshmen, who did not spend last year playing against professionals, as Gallinari did. Hollinger projects that his rookie PER will be 13.21, which would be quite promising for a 20 year old player. He likely is not a future star, but despite the mislabeling by ESPN commentators who know nothing about the Euroleague, is a player who ought to be able to make an immediate impact and should be an above-average NBA starter in 3 years. Amen to Chad Ford, who I just noticed said pretty much exactly the same things as I just did in his draft grading.

Orlando Magic:
Grade: C
Picks: Courtney Lee

An OK pick, but I don't see a lot of evidence that Lee is anything more than a solid scoring guard who will come off the bench.

Philadelphia 76ers:
Grade: B
Picks: Marreese Speights

I have some qualms about Speights, but his statistics are overwhelming. My concerns are why he only played 24 minutes a game at Florida, and from what I've heard, it is related to his lack of conditioning and poor work ethic, neither of which are good signs. I fear that he will turn into a Mike Sweetney or Ike Diogu in the NBA, players who are very productive, but get little playing time due to other flaws in their games.

Phoenix Suns:
Grade: D
Picks: Robin Lopez, Goran Dragic

It seems to me that a collapse from the Suns is imminent. Maybe not this year, but it could be the year after. Their title window has passed and Nash's productivity will soon begin to decline. Picking #15, they're not going to solve all their problems, but they should at least have gone for a guy who has the upside to be a starter. Robin Lopez's upside is as an energy guy off the bench. I covered my dislike of selecting Robin with a mid-first round pick in our mock draft, so I won't go into it too much more except to say that the Suns really whiffed on this pick.

Portland Trail Blazers:
Grade: A
Picks: Jerryd Bayless, Nicolas Batum

I give the Blazers an A because although I am far from a fan of Batum, I am amazed that the Blazers managed to walk out of the draft with a potential 20+ ppg scorer in Bayless despite holding the #13 pick. Perhaps there is a non-arbitrary reason that Bayless slipped, in which case this may not be as much of a steal as I think. But I have not heard any newfound negatives against him, and I continue to think that he was one of the top 5 players in this draft. More importantly, the Blazers are absolutely stacked with Rudy Fernandez coming over from Europe and Greg Oden coming back from injury to join Brandon Roy and LaMarcus Aldridge. Their bench is loaded with young talent like Bayless, Batum, Travis Outlaw, Martell Webster, Sergio Rodriguez, Channing Frye, and Ike Diogu. Best of all with Raef LaFrentz and Steve Francis soon to come off the books, the Blazers may have the cap room to pursue a Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade, or dare I say, a LeBron, in 2 years. This team may very well be the dynasty of the 2010s if they play their cards right (and if Oden and Fernandez are as good as expected).

Sacramento Kings
Grade: D
Picks: Jason Thompson, Sean Singletary, Patrick Ewing Jr.

I don't want to beat up on Jason Thompson too much but although his numbers are very good, the history of big men from small conferences isn't (unless they were totally dominant, a la David Robinson). Maybe he'll be a solid bench player, but if the Kings wanted him so badly, they should have traded down where they still could have gotten him and some other pieces of value. Their second-round picks also are not the most inspiring, especially Ewing Jr., whose selection makes a nice story, but this is a guy who played four years and never started in college. A prospect who already was an energy guy off the bench likely won't even be able to be that at the pro level.

San Antonio Spurs
Grade: B
Picks: George Hill, Malik Hairston, James Gist

You can criticize the Spurs for taking Hill with Mario Chalmers still on the board, but I still love them for rolling the dice with this pick. I want to see what George Hill can do in the NBA if he gets the chance, and now I'm going to get it.

Seattle Supersonics
Grade: C+
Picks: Russell Westbrook, Serge Ibaka, DJ White, DeVon Hardin

I think the Sonics have had the right idea with their organization - letting Ray Allen and Rashard Lewis go while stockpiling young talent for the Kevin Durant era. Yet apart from the obvious pick of Durant, I haven't been that big a fan of Sam Presti's draft choices. He's now used top 5 picks the last two years on Jeff Green and Westbrook, both of whom, in my mind, are most likely to be role players in the NBA. Green still has time to improve, but his rookie performance was not all that encouraging (single-digit PER). They've added more young, solid parts to their team, so I can't fault them entirely, but I don't see the #2 to Durant's #1 on their roster.

Toronto Raptors:
Grade: C
Picks: Nathan Jawai

It's hard to say, but I'm guessing that Jawai won't really pan out. He averaged about 18 points and 9 rebounds a game in the NBL, an Australian basketball league. From my brief visit to the NBL website, it does look like a legitimate league with some former NCAA stars, but it being a lower level you would hope that he would be more dominant. For comparison, Julius Hodge, a former first-round pick who never made it in the NBA averaged 24 points, 9 rebounds, and 6 assists per game in the NBL this year. Jawai was one of the better players in the league (8th in efficiency per 40), but this may not be enough.

Utah Jazz:
Grade: B
Picks: Kosta Koufos, Ante Tomic, Tadija Dragicevic

A solid, if unspectacular draft for the Jazz. Koufos is another example of a player who would have gone 15 spots higher five years ago and been a disappointment - at #23, he is a nice addition to the team. From what I've read about Tomic, he is a good second-round prospect, and Dragicevic, as the Adriatic League MVP, may have some potential, although his statistics were good, but not dominating.

Washington Wizards:
Grade: C-
Picks: JaVale McGee

I can't believe that I'm in this position, but I think DeAndre Jordan would have been a better pick here. A month ago, I was ready to write incendiary posts about how Jordan was an obvious bust. Yet if anything, McGee seems to be a more obvious bust. I think Jordan, if given the chance, will be a solid bench center. McGee is not only a year older than Jordan but has failed to make an impact at a lesser level of play. He is a decent shot-blocker, but historically, you would like a shot-blocker who averages 1 or more blocks per personal foul, and McGee is not at that level. At least the Wizards get some upside with this pick, although I doubt McGee reaches it.

NBA MOCK DRAFT 2008

Welcome to our 2008 NBA Mock Draft.

A couple comments should be made before we get started. Our selections are based on what Jeremiah and I believe teams should do, not what they will do. This mock draft is about evaluating talent and deciding how each team should approach improving their roster based on what's available. Jeremiah and I alternate picks, with myself assigned to the odd ones and Jeremiah the even. It's not a competition, merely a way to make it interactive for both of us and allow multiple approaches to drafting (though our methods are rather similar in most circumstances). We also conducted this draft before the debauchery of ESPN's own duo mock draft with Bill Simmons and Chad Ford, but because we are lazy it just took us several days to type up our comments and post it. Finally, constructive criticism and questions are greatly appreciated.

Without further ado... I am on the clock...
1.) Chicago Bulls: Michael Beasley
H: I know the media has been hyping Rose for several weeks now but Beasley's numbers are simply unreal. He can score (30.9 pts/40), get to the line (10 FTA/40), and rebound (14.6 r/40) better than any player in this draft while maintaining efficient percentages (53.2/77.4/37.9). He also fills the Bulls' long need for an interior scorer and with T.J. Ford soon to be on the trading market there are other ways to address Kirk Hinrich's sudden inability to play basketball.
J: Worst case, he puts up stats but isn't a championship-type player. Sure, that would be disappointing, but Rose is no lock to be a franchise player either.

2.) Miami Heat: Derrick Rose
J: Easy pick here. The Heat want Rose, and they get him in our mock draft. I will say that I see him more as a star than a superstar. It's hard for me to see him averaging 10+ assists per game, a la Deron Williams or Chris Paul, nor do I see him averaging 25+ points, like I believe Beasley is capable of doing. That's still a lot of room for him to be very good, and I believe he will develop into a more consistent version of Baron Davis.

3.) Minnesota Timberwolves: Jerryd Bayless
H: I know the Timberwolves are big fans of O.J. Mayo and while I certainly wouldn't scoff at picking him here, I'm a bigger fan of Bayless. I have much more faith in his ability to play PG than Mayo and I like the idea of a dual PG system with him and Foye on the floor at the same time. Bayless also has better penetrating ability than Mayo, getting to the line 3.4 more times per 40 while Mayo settled for 3's a larger percentage of the time.

4.) Seattle Supersonics: Kevin Love
J: If you look closely at the Kevin Love bandwagon, you can see me in the driver's seat, whip outstretched (think horses). He gets a decent number of blocks, some steals, and a whole lot of rebounds, suggesting that he is a better athlete than we are led to believe or he is crafty enough to make up for it. He is a very well-rounded player, who lest we forget, is not necessarily a finished product. He has plenty of time to drop 25 pounds and work on his explosiveness. Don't rule out All-Star berths in his future.
H: I like this pick a lot given that Bayless is off the board and that having two alpha-dog scorers like Durant and Mayo on the floor at the same time might not gel.

5.) Memphis Grizzlies: O.J. Mayo
H: The Grizzlies need a big man but Jeremiah kindly reminded me that I shouldn't reach for a team need when it comes at the cost of crossing a tier. Mayo, Bayless, and Love consist of what I would consider my second tier of players available and reaching for Lopez would be foolish with Mayo still available. Mayo is a dynamic scorer who plays great defense and will hopefully be a part of a strong backcourt with whomever the Grizzlies eventually choose to be their PG of the future.

6.) New York Knicks: Danilo Gallinari
J: Gallinari is fairly young and posted a 19.3 PER in the Euroleague this season. Historically, this is a high enough mark to suggest that he will be able to play in the NBA right away with a PER in the 11-13 range. At worst, a solid contributor, and at best, a great piece in Mike D'Antoni's offense who is young enough to get a lot better.
H: I agree with Jeremiah that Gallinari isn't necessarily the next best player available, but he brings a different atmosphere with him to the Knicks and this pick is by no means a reach. I think this pick would mark a strong effort to start rebuilding a franchise that has gotten so off-course and begin moving in a new direction.

7.) Los Angeles Clippers: Russell Westbrook
H: I'm not a big fan of Westbrook, but the Clippers are losing seven players this off-season and they'll still have a viable starter at each position except at PG. Westbrook will probably take a few years to develop as he settles into his new role (his PG/SG role was consistently morphing while at UCLA) but the franchise appears to be in no hurry to make a playoff run.
J: It's scary to draft Westbrook this high, since he won't be able to contribute much offensively as a rookie, but he does have the frame and athleticism to get better. A gamble, but worst-case is a defensive guard off the bench.

8.) Milwaukee Bucks: Joe Alexander
J: I'm bolstered by Hollinger's strong projection behind this pick. Then again, his system liked Tyrus Thomas too, who as Chad Ford points out, is another athletic, high-energy player who looks lost on the basketball court. Nonetheless I like Alexander. He is an 'upside pick', but, anecdotally, he has the work ethic to make the most of it.
H: I oscillate everyday between really liking this guy and not understanding his appeal. Either way I think this spot accurately represents his skill level relative to what's available.

9.) Charlotte Bobcats: Eric Gordon
H: I honestly don't know what I was doing with this pick. I don't like Felton but drafting Augustin just cause he apparently won't fit Larry Brown's system, as suggested by some, just seems wasteful. This team has gone nowhere in its four years and seem bent on establishing themselves as the Tampa Bay Devil Rays (they're still the Devil Rays in my mind no matter what management says) of the NBA. Gordon was falling and I just swooped in and grabbed in.
J: I still don't know what to think about Gordon. His rebound and assist totals are scarily low, and you can't trust his shooting numbers because of his late-season, injury-related slump. He could be a very good, if one-dimensional, scorer but also a flat out bust.

10.) New Jersey Nets: Brook Lopez
J: I see Lopez as a nice big man off the bench. He has a solid Hollinger projection, and is big and skilled. He shoots a low percentage but will be able to get his jump shots off with impunity thanks to his height. Not a lot of upside, but seems like a pretty safe bet to make a contribution.

11.) Indiana Pacers: Anthony Randolph
H: The third pick I don't enjoy making. I'm not a big fan of Randolph but the Pacers are set for the next four years at PG with Tinsley, ruling out Augustin. The main justification for taking Randolph is the Pacers' lack of a defined need and the fact they are just starting to rebuild and Randolph is a long-term project. At 18 he's the youngest player in the draft and though Hollinger has made special note of Randolph's potential shortcomings the Pacers might as well take the gamble given that they don't really have anything to lose.
J: Randolph was quite inefficient this season but is at least 18 and athletic. Gerald Wallace is an example of a similar player who after his freshman season was if anything, even rawer than Randolph at the same age, yet has gone on to be a pretty good player in the NBA.

12.) Sacramento Kings: D.J. Augustin
J: Augustin's pure point rating is more solid than spectacular (in truth, I prefer Ty Lawson, but he withdrew), and thus I see him more as a very good backup point who will score and distribute. For the Kings, that's enough to take the starting job.
H: This ordering worked out perfect for the Kings who just dealt Mike Bibby and immediately get a chance to begin finding his replacement.

13.) Portland Trailblazers: Mario Chalmers
H: I have been salivating over Chalmers' numbers for sometime now and John Hollinger corroborated my admiration of Chalmers with his PER regression study. Chalmers is undersized at 6'1" but a tremendous defender for his stature and a PG whose distributing ability continues to improve as his turnovers/40 numbers have plummeted each year (4.1/3.1/2.5). He plays off the ball well too, nailing over 45% of his 3pt FG attempts last year and this'll allow Brandon Roy to remain as a primary ball-handler on the offensive end. This pick would also allow the Trailblazers to move Steve Blake to the bench where he rightfully belongs.

14.) Golden State Warriors: Marreese Speights
J: Speights is an underrated scorer and rebounder. I perhaps should have taken Darrell Arthur here as Speights will need to improve his conditioning to fit in with Golden State (he only played about 25 minutes a game at Florida) but what can I say, I've been enamored with Speights ever since he posted a PER of 41 in limited minutes as a freshman. A classic 20-10 college power forward.
H: A reach in some people's minds but I really think people are underrating his numbers. I like Speights's potential and only qualm with him is the horrific spelling of his first name.

15.) Phoenix Suns: Brandon Rush
H: At 22 Rush may have limited upside but the Suns are in a win now mentality and Rush fits their system perfectly as a big wing who can shoot from range and also is a top-notch defender. He'll be there Raja Bell 2.0 presuming they don't sell this pick, which is always a possibility.

16.) Philadelphia 76ers: Darrell Arthur
J: I have to admit, I was not big on Arthur but his strong Hollinger projection has gone a long way to soothe some of my fears. Additionally, he was one of the key players on an absolutely loaded Kansas team, and it seems a good bet that on a team that was so dominant, there are bound to be some solid pros. The concern is his motor, but he would solidify Philadelphia's frontcourt rotation.
H: What I said for Speights goes for Arthur too. I think he'll fit nicely alongside Dalembert or as a role player off the bench.

17.) Toronto Raptors: Kosta Koufos
H: Koufos suits the Raptors' deficiency at the 5 spot and makes Radoslav Nesterovic and his $8 million expiring contract more expendable. I prefer Koufos over some of the other mid-late 1st round centers like DeAndre Jordan, Robin Lopez, and JaVale McGee because of his ability to get a decent number of blocks per 40 (2.8) without drawing too many fouls (3.3) and more importantly turned the ball over only 2.3 times per 40 while handling the rock far more often than all of the players mentioned above.

18.) Washington Wizards: DeAndre Jordan
J: I've never been a fan of Jordan, as he fits the stereotype of the classic bust center (then again, so did Andrew Bynum). Yet with his stock falling, it's worth mentioning that a similarly raw and young center, Sam Dalembert, turned out to be a useful player for Philadelphia after a few years. I don't see Jordan as a future star but at #18, he is good value.

19.) Cleveland Cavaliers: Chris Douglas-Roberts
H: The Cavs are really in need of better players at any position and ones who don't mimic the skill sets of others (ie: Pavlovic and Szczerbiak, Varajao and Wallace). CDR provides a scoring threat off the bench that isn't based around sitting and waiting for a teammate to draw a double-team and then dish them the ball. CDR will hopefully providing a slashing and driving attack that'll diversify the Cavs' offensive threat and ease the load on Lebron.
J: Don't forget that Chris Douglas-Roberts has apparently never lost a game of one-on-one. His numbers compare to a litany of bench shooting guards, but watching him play, he's anything but generic. Don't rule out the possibility that his unorthodox scoring abilities will serve him very well with the right team.

20.) Denver Nuggets: Alexis Ajinca
J: Okay I admit that I drafted Ajinca because I didn't really see any pressing needs for the Nuggets. Consider it my 'what the hell' pick. From what I've read about Ajinca, and after seeing Chad Ford's surprising condemnation of him, he probably isn't worth drafting this high.
H: I just started laughing when I saw this pick because I immediately knew Jeremiah's motives and concurred with them.

21.) New Jersey Nets: Richard Hendrix
H: This pick along with the 10th selection give the Nets two shots at strengthening their frontline. I reached for Hendrix over the other big men projected to go in the latter half of the first round but I feel it's justified. He mounted a grueling scoring record at 22.3 pts/40 while shooting 60% from the field. He rebounds at a strong rate (12.7), gets a decent number of blocks relative to fouls (2.5/3.7), doesn't turn the ball over (2.2), and grabs a surprising number of steals given his position (2.5). Overall, he's much more well-rounded than the any of the alternatives. Also props to Jeremiah for finding this sleeper, I couldn't pass up the opportunity to pick him though I'm sure Jeremiah would've preferred to, hehe.
J: Richard Hendrix is my boy! Unfortunately, he had a surprisingly low projected PER or I might have recommended that he go higher. It does seem odd to me that scouts are not higher on a player who is both athletic and productive, so this may be a sign that they know something I don't.

22.) Orlando Magic: Robin Lopez
J: Neither of the Lopez twins really get me excited, but Robin even less so. Supposedly he'll be an energy guy, but I feel that GMs are forgetting that players who were stars in college become energy guys in the pros and players who were energy guys in college head overseas in three years. The comparison to Joakim Noah is thus misguided, because Noah was a dominant and far more productive college player. Nonetheless, he's one of the best big men remaining at the board at this point. Also, I forgot about Roy Hibbert.
H: If you're noticing a big men trend, you're not the only one. This pick marks the 6th frontcourt player in the last seven picks, and the trend's not gonna stop yet.

23.) Utah Jazz. Roy Hibbert
H: I was initially looking in other directions (a better backup for Deron Williams would be nice) but reconsidered when I realized that Jarron Collins is the first man off the bench backing up Mehmet Okur. Hibbert hasn't always been the most aggressive player and he's pretty much already reached his peak, but the Jazz won't be demanding a whole lot from this selection. Hibbert should easily provide the defense and finishing ability (two of his best traits) the Jazz need from a big man off the bench.

24.) Seattle Supersonics: Donte Greene
J: Young enough to get better, but was a very inefficient player at Syracuse. Nonetheless, he should be able to create his own shot in the NBA, being a tall jump-shooter, and that's a first-round type of skill.
H: I really believe he's overrated given his numbers and I think his falling to the Sonics sufficiently illustrates our assessment of his skill set.

25.) Houston Rockets: Jason Thompson
H: They need a big guy to backup Yao, Jason Thompson's a big guy. He's also very good at rebounding.

26.) San Antonio Spurs: J.J. Hickson
J: Hickson's numbers are pretty good for a freshman, yet there is a certain stigma attached to him for playing on an awful team. I don't want to rely too much on team success, but it is a factor, and Hickson couldn't even bring NC State to a .500 level. Still, he's got some upside and would be a nice pick this late in the first round.

27.) New Orleans Hornets: JaVale McGee
H: Take word for word what I said about the Rockets' pick of Thompson, except replace "Yao" with "Chandler" and "rebounding" with "shot blocking".
J: The thing is, if centers aren't dominant in college, they usually don't amount to much in the NBA, where there are many more players who are their size. And it's worse if they're in a small conference. A Jason Thompson has fantastic numbers, but history says that it doesn't mean much playing for Rider. McGee played for Nevada, which is a little higher up the food chain, but was anything but dominant. A scary proposition when he couldn't really do much in a non-power conference.

28.) Memphis Grizzlies: Ryan Anderson
J: A couple years ago, I would have been all over Ryan Anderson as a sleeper, as he was a very productive scorer and rebounder at Cal. However, time has taught me that productivity does not always translate to NBA success (although lack of productivity generally translates to NBA failure), and in the case of Anderson, his woefully low steal and block totals imply that he doesn't have the athleticism to score at the same rates in the pros. Nonetheless, he's a nice pick at #28. Being tall and a very good shooter, he ought to be able to play a role off the bench.


29.) Detroit Pistons: Bill Walker
H: The forgotten sidekick of Michael Beasley. I actually think he's good enough to warrant a pick 6-7 slots higher but given the lack of star talent in this draft I felt team needs should play a larger role than small differences in skills. I'm a little perturbed by his complete lack of outside shooting but he rebounds very well for his size and is a very efficient and potent scorer inside the arc.
J: Walker is the kind of player who could be a huge steal in the late first or early second round. His numbers aren't overwhelming, but he's had a lot of injury problems and has shown some talent. It's not out of the question that he could turn out to be very good, although he would be a big risk with a higher pick, which makes him great for Detroit at 29.

30.) Boston Celtics: George Hill
J: Yeah, George Hill is a 6'2" shooting guard from a small conference. History has not been kind to these types of players. But goddamn, averaging 21.5 points, 6.8 rebounds, and 4.3 assists while shooting 45% from 3 is worth some major props. He showcased a versatile and flat-out dominant game at IUPUI, and apart from scoring 30 plus points a night, did everything possible to earn a long look at the end of the first round. Thanks to Hugh for the suggestion to take him here.
H: My big sleeper of the 2008 draft. Throughout the season I'll be routing heavily for Hill and Chalmers to validate my praise for them.

Three for One Scouting Report: Mayo, Bayless, and Gordon

In my mind, I always lump O.J. Mayo, Jerryd Bayless, and Eric Gordon together. All are shooting guards, although Mayo and Bayless lay claims to playing the point. All were 20+ point per game scorers as freshmen, with developed perimeter games. Bayless and Gordon also were great at getting to the foul line. All show a lack of versatility that could indicate their overratedness as prospects.

First, the numbers (pace-adjusted, per 40 statistics taken from draftexpress.com):

Bayless: 22.7 pts, 3.1 rbs, 4.6 asts, 40.7% 3P, 1.1 stls, 8.5 FTA, -0.85 PPR
Mayo: 22.8 pts, 5.0 rbs, 3.6 asts, 40.9% 3P, 1.7 stls, 5.1 FTA, -3.71 PPR
Gordon: 24.0 pts, 3.7 rbs, 2.8 asts, 33.7% 3P, 1.5 stls, 9.9 FTA, -5.72 PPR

Normally, I would say that in particular, Gordon's lack of versatility kills him as a prospect. His and Bayless' low rates of rebounding are usually signs that they are players whose scoring gifts will not translate to the NBA. However, it is very rare for short guards like Bayless and Gordon to get to the foul line so often, and guards who got to the line more often than 8.0 FTA per 40 in college are a fairly successful group. This includes Allen Iverson, Dwyane Wade, Larry Hughes, Jerry Stackhouse, Corey Maggette, Ruben Patterson, and Bonzi Wells. Apart from Iverson, these are all actually bigger guards than Bayless and Gordon, suggesting the uniqueness of the two.

As for Mayo, his more solid all-around game gives him less bust potential in my mind. He is certainly the best rebounder of the three and the best at getting steals. His turnover rate is quite high, but I am willing to chalk this up to being put in the alpha dog role as a freshman. The burning question for me is whether or not Mayo can actually play the point. A look at some other scoring combo guards who could pass might be useful. Stephon Marbury, who came up as a comparable player to Jerryd Bayless under my similarity scores system had a pure point rating of -0.57, but has a career mark of 5.57 in the NBA. Now, Marbury is obviously not a pass-first player himself, but I don't think anyone is expecting Bayless to become the next Paul. As for Mayo, his PPR is probably too low for me to project him gaining more than spot duty at the point, but it is worth noting that a comparable player to him, Chauncey Billups, had a PPR of -2.57 as a freshman before improving to 0.92 as a sophomore.

Ultimately, I rank the three in the following order: Mayo, Bayless, and then Gordon. All are solid prospects who project as NBA starters but carry much more risk than Beasley or Rose. Given their youth, their flaws should be ironed out in time, but I wouldn't necessarily expect any of the three to make an immediate impact on a team next year. It is close between Mayo and Bayless as to which is better, but Mayo's size and rebounding imply to me that he has less chance of being a bust, whereas Bayless' low rebounding and steal numbers are potential red flags. Mayo also should be the superior defender. Eric Gordon is a big risk to me - I do believe that based on his free-throw drawing ability and perimeter shooting, he will be able to score at a high level in the NBA. I should note that I am assuming that he is a better 3-point shooter than his final season numbers show. He was shooting .411 from 3 before a 10 for 62 slump at the end of the year. Considering that this slump coincided with both a wrist injury and team turmoil surrounding the firing of Kelvin Sampson, I am willing to believe that he is closer to a .411 shooter than a .337 shooter from 3. Even so, his upside is as a pure scorer with more or less zero contribution in other facets of the game, and it is possible he could bust altogether. In a stronger draft, Gordon might be better suited as a later lottery pick, but the depth of this draft is questionable.

Final Verdict: Mayo looks like a solid #4 pick in the draft, Bayless #5, and despite my qualms, I would take Gordon at #6 as well.

Scouting Reports: Derrick Rose

Derrick Rose
6'3" 190 lbs
Freshman PG, Memphis

Pace-adjusted, per-40 statistics (from draftexpress.com)

19.5 pts, 5.9 rbs, 6.2 asts, 3.5 TOs, 1.6 stls, 52.3 2FG%, 33.7 3FG%

Although I have cast my lot with Beasley for the #1 pick, Rose is one of three players in the draft who I think is a sure-fire NBA starter and a likely All-Star. The question is whether he will develop more as a scoring point guard, ala Baron Davis, or a superior passer, like Chris Paul and Deron Williams. Based on his statistics, the Baron Davis comparison is particularly apt:

Baron Davis - age 19 (sophomore) (pace-adjusted, per-40)

19.3 pts, 4.4 rbs, 6.2 asts, 4.0 TOs, 3.0 stls, 54.8 2FG%, 34.3 3FG%

The comparison between these two players is an apt one. They are both about the same size, and had very similar college statistics. Rose was the superior rebounder and Davis the superior ball thief, although Davis also committed more personal fouls. I had been concerned about Rose's mediocre 3-point shooting, but Davis, although never becoming a great shooter, has been good enough, as shooting is probably the easiest skill to improve in the NBA.

Ultimately, I think that Rose grades out based on the numbers as a player who may have a similar career to Baron Davis - although Davis took awhile to develop, his career is certainly worth the #2 pick in this draft. Yet some analysts have compared Rose to Chris Paul with Deron Williams' size. At first glance, these comparisons seem off, as Rose's pure point rating was a less than stellar 1.52, while Chris Paul posted PPRs of 3.73 and 4.76 in college, and Deron Williams, whose PPR was above 4.0 all 3 years in college, posted a 4.96 his junior year. DraftExpress has argued that his assist numbers are deflated because Memphis' dribble-drive motion offense is "not conducive to racking up assists." This raises intriguing questions that I unfortunately cannot answer, but may determine how good of a prospect he is. If Rose truly could have averaged 8 assists per 40, as Paul and Williams did, with a different team, then I would consider him a prospect equal to Beasley. His statistics suggest a player who will average about 20 points and 8 assists per game at his peak in the NBA, making him an All-Star, but not a franchise-type player, yet the possibility that he may be a superior passer who was hampered by the Memphis system could make him worthy of the #1 pick. It is up to NBA scouts to answer this question for themselves.

Final Verdict: Whether or not he is truly a franchise PG, it is hard to go wrong with a player who at the very least, looks like the second coming of Baron Davis. You don't find many draft prospects who you can pencil in for ten solid years as a starter in the NBA, but Rose looks like one of them.

Derrick Rose Shot Breakdown:

Dunks/Tip-ins: 5% of shots, 95.0% FG
Layups: 34% of shots, 61.1% FG
2-point jumpers: 38% of shots, 37.1% FG
3-point jumpers: 23% of shots, 33.7% FG

Scouting Reports: Michael Beasley

It seems to me that it's time to breathe new life into this dead sports blog of ours. So starting today, I will kick off a month of wall-to-wall NBA draft coverage with a series of scouting reports on this year's top prospects.


Michael Beasley
6'9" 235 lbs
Freshman PF, Kansas State

Honestly, it's baffling to me how Beasley's personal matters are overshadowing a freshman season that by nearly any standard, was better than Kevin Durant's National Player of the Year run the year before. Both Beasley and OJ Mayo put aside their baggage for their debut college seasons and played motivated hard-working basketball. However, Mayo is seen as having moved beyond his troubles in high school whereas Beasley has not. Yet Beasley's results on the court were far superior, and Pat Riley will woefully regret letting player personalities blind him to the talent that is waiting to fall into his hands.

Pace-adjusted, per 40 statistics (from draftexpress.com):

30.9 ppg, 14.6 rpg, 1.5 stls, 1.9 blks, 56.2 2FG%, 37.9 3FG%

This is a forward who was the top scorer and one of the three best rebounders in the country, athletic enough to average 1.5 steals, a high number for a power forward. Best of all, he has a versatile, high-percentage offensive game that suggests he will continue to be a big-time scorer at the pro level. Here are his shooting statistics when broken down by type of shot:

Dunks/Tip-ins: 9% of shots, 85.1% FG
Layups: 32% of shots, 61.4% FG
2-point jumpers: 42% of shots, 45.3% FG
3-point jumpers: 17% of shots, 37.9% FG

These numbers may not mean a lot out of context, but hopefully as I unveil more of these scouting reports, they will become more meaningful. Here, I should point out that 45.3% is a phenomenal number on 2-point jumpers, and that he has a clearly developed inside-outside game. When translating statistics to the pro level, rebounding usually carries over fairly well, a good sign for Beasley, but it is hard to predict how scoring will translate. However, considering his high volume of shots, his ability to shoot jumpers and get to the rim, and his athleticism, he should be able to get a high number of shots off at the NBA level and score fairly efficiently as well. He can be an immediate 20-10 player and if he is able to put up those kinds of numbers as a 20-year old rookie, then the sky may be the limit.

Scouting can supplement the statistical breakdown by telling us that Beasley may not have the same upside as Durant due to the concerns about his character and work ethic, and thus he projects more as a perennial All-Star than a potential all-time great. Yet a perennial All-Star is still worthy of a #1 overall pick, and it amazes me how many analysts are willing to put too much stock in the upside of a DeAndre Jordan, a player who has shown much less on-court motivation than Beasley (not to mention production), and not consider that Beasley is young enough and talented enough to get a lot better himself.

Final verdict: If Beasley wants it, he can be an MVP-type player. I personally don't see him reaching that level, but I see him as a deadly scorer and rebounder who will make All-Star teams year after year. A great choice at #1.

A's Deal Haren for Stong Package of Prospects

After the Twins couldn't find a suitor that fit, the A's dealt Haren for a bucket of young players. The D-Backs made a great trade partner, having an incredibly deep farm system capable of attracting the A's attention and while Arizona payed a high but fair price, they could certainly afford it. Haren makes for one of the best #2 starters in the game and will give the D-Backs a fierce 1-2 punch reminiscent of Schilling and Johnson. As always, let's take a look at each of the players involved in this deal...

Arizona's take:
Dan Haren - Top tier pitcher who has been eating innings for three years straight. His home run totals are a little worrisome but the switch to the weaker league and one of the worst hitting divisions should keep his numbers around what they were last year.

Connor Robertson - A potential bullpen piece who had dominated minors until he struggled in AAA last year. He's 25 and probably won't get much better, but Robertson is certainly capable of finding a role in Arizona's bullpen if he bounces back well.

Oakland's take:
Dana Eveland - Don't be fooled by the effeminate name, Eveland's a big lefty who could easily be in Oakland's rotation to start the season. Injuries hampered him a bit last year but still maintained a sub-2.00 ERA in AAA last year. Eveland's got strong stuff but he has yet to translate it to the major leagues, getting hammered in multiple stints with the D-Backs and Brewers. Overcoming some weight problems may give him the boost to break into Oakland's rotation this spring.

Greg Smith - A moderate lefty who is ready to make the jumps to the majors. He needs a decent third-pitch behind his quality fastball and curveball, the development of which should allow him to warrant a spot in the back-end of the A's staff.

Aaron Cunningham - A Melky Cabrera-esque prospect who can play all three outfield spots and hits for average, a little power, and can run. Cunningham's not as strong defensively as Cabrera and he'll be 22 when he starts the year in AA or AAA, but he's a top-notch utility outfielder. It's unlikely that he'll be able to maintain his power numbers in the majors but his speed and good average should keep in the pros.

Carlos Gonzalez - Gonzalez was yet another top-quality outfield prospect in Arizona's system and with him being less than a year away from MLB ready it made sense to include him in this deal. Gonzalez hits for average, power, has a cannon of an arm in right and was ranked as the 23rd best prospect by MILB (though a lot of that ranking was based on ceiling rather than performance). Gonzalez will definitely be spending some amount of time in the majors in 2008, it's just a matter of how hot of start he gets in AAA.

Brett Anderson - The 6'4" southpaw put up impressive numbers out of high school in A. He's had some injuries and there have been concerns about his pitching motion but despite these minor issues Anderson has a lot of potential at the tender age of 19.

Chris Carter - The D-Backs ship of Carter after acquiring from the White Sox in the Carlos Quentin deal. Carter is a poor defensive first-baseman who mashed his way through A-ball last year with 25 home runs. He does hit for some average and walks fairly often to compliment his power, but it's his ability to hit the long ball that should eventually get him to the major league level.

All of the guys en route to Oakland are at least B-level prospects and while none of them make your mouth water, the A's got more than adequate value for Haren. I was always hoping the Yankees would make a play for Haren but given what Arizona offered the Yanks would've had to start with at least Horne, Marquez, and Jackson. The D-Backs, despite their massive out performance of their Pythagorean last year look in great shape to take the NL West again.

The Mitchell Report (Post-Release)

Grimsley's testimony was corroborated in all circumstances, making the evidence against those listed in my previous post sufficiently substantiated (at least in my eyes). I won't delve into the complications of how thorough the evidence is for each of the players (because that would be too lengthy) or just the ones considered important (because I feel that neglects the cases of those less prominent). Instead I think it's pertinent to discuss two major issues aroused by this report.

The first is the magnitude of the steroids problem. Names appeared on this list that few saw coming (Denny Neagle and Mo Vaughn both caught me off guard), but the cases against many of these players were built off of a select group of informants. Since a large portion of the evidence is in the form of testimony from players or trainers and because the Mitchell investigation only extracted information from a small number of these groups, the actual number of steroid users is undoubtedly much greater.

Three organizations had a predominantly large number of players using steroids: the Yankees in 2001 (Sheffield, Giambi, Pettitte, Clemens), the Dodgers in 2000 and 2001 (Brown, Gagne, Hundley), and the Orioles in 2003 (Tejada, Bigbie, Gibbons, Roberts). There are numerous other connections and trends one can find, but these stood out to me. Imagine however if the Mitchell investigation found evidence from a trainer on the Braves, the Red Sox, or the Cubs. It's highly probable that there are equally large number of players on other teams that were shooting up at the same time but have yet been exposed. This hypothesis in no way justifies what happened in all the other clubhouses but it makes you wonder if we're really seeing the entire scope of this problem.

The other controversial issue is whether or not to induct steroid users into the Hall of Fame (note: I'm going to use steroids as a term for all banned substances that are considered cheating, including HGH, for convenience). The new name obviously added to this controversial list is Roger Clemens. Here are the two arguments I have heard for why one should vote for Clemens or Bonds or any of the others in comparable situations:
1.) The player had accumulated a sufficiently impressive resume of statistics and awards before he began using steroids. By using steroids he did not surpass the boundary between HOF worthy and unworthy. Therefore the player should be admitted based on his merits before steroid use.
2.) It is impossible to judge how many players used steroids during this era and even more difficult to pinpoint which ones. Due to this difficulty, one cannot deny a player's entry without denying all of the players from this era unless we have absolute proof of their cheating (ie: positive test).

Both of these arguments fail to neglect the moral issues associated with the Hall of Fame in different ways. The first effectively chooses to ignore what a player does after he has reached HOF status. To paraphrase the argument, "a player reaches a certain statistical pedestal than he is absolved of any and all infractions or misdeeds that he may do following the reaching of this mark". When you put a player's plaque on the wall in Cooperstown you can't choose to acknowledge and ignore specified portions of that player's career. This decision sends a message to children that it is alright to use steroids if certain qualifications and circumstances are met.

The second argument is flawed in that it chooses to be selectively naive. By refusing to believe multiple corroborating and independent testimonies against a certain individual one is being very demanding as to what constitutes sufficient proof of cheating. However, when they claim that they cannot consider this person's merits altered based on the presumption that others were likely using too than one is being overly presumptuous based on minimal evidence. Furthermore, the whole conception of judging a player based on the actions of other players is absurd and doesn't acknowledge the consequences of electing a likely steroid user into the Hall of Fame (I'll address the issue of "likely" later on).

One's decision to elect a worthy player to the Hall of Fame who should be dictated by a single belief: whether or not the voter believes the player used steroids. If the voter believes that player used steroids, under any circumstance, he should not vote the player into the Hall of Fame because he violated the rules of the game and by electing him it portrays steroid use in as acceptable to people of all ages. Cheating is not excusable under any circumstances. If the voter believes with all certainty that the player never cheated, than by all means he/she should vote for him.

Herein lies the flaw with the voting system. If one is unsure, they should choose to abstain and thereby require that player to get the necessary percentage of votes from the remaining individuals but not count that particular voter in their percentage calculation. I understand that this description is quite complicated so think of the situation as follows: There are 300 voters and I abstain for one player, than for that player instead of needing say 75% of 300 votes, he needs 75% of 299 votes. Those voters who think it's "likely" the player cheated but are not sufficiently persuaded should take this course of action.

People may not like the idea of turning the Hall of Fame vote into a jury trial but that's what steroids have forced upon us. In a jury one would not declare a person's innocence or guilt without being absolutely confident in one's decision. I will withhold my own beliefs regarding specific players because that is irrelevant here. What is important is that the voters consider the facts in the most objective and comprehensive way possible and make their decisions according to these principles in line with how one would normally vote in terms of deciding a person's guilt.

Tejada, Rowand, and Fukudome

If you were getting bored with the lack of action this baseball off-season then you should get your web browser open cause players are moving all across the country. Let's do a quick synopsis of what transpired to today and what teams came out on top.

Aaron Rowand signs with Giants - Jones got $18.1 million per year, Hunter got $18 million, and the Giants somehow corralled Rowand with a five year deal at $12 million a pop. Rowand's offensive performance has been inconsistent over the last four years but as long as he's hitting at his career average of .286/.343/.462 and plays quality defense in the center this contract is of good value. Rowand plays hard and you wonder if his body will hold up through the end of this contract when Rowand will 35. Despite this fact, Rowand's a great leader and hustle player that you want in your clubhouse.

Kosuke Fukudome signs with Cubs - Fukudome's ability to hit for average, moderate power, and quality eye make him a great signing for the Cubs. Keith Law keenly pointed to Fukudome's likeness to Bobby Abreu and at the age of 30, the Japanese import should put up .290/.380/.460 type numbers.


Miguel Tejada for Scott, Patton, Albers, Sarfate, and Costanzo - For what the Astros gave up to get Tejada this trade would've been a pretty good deal, if the Astros had a flourishing farm system and if the Astros were in any sort of contention for a playoff spot. But neither of those if's are true. Luke Scott's a fourth outfielder who at the age of 29 probably won't put up numbers like he did in his half year stint in 2006. Matt Albers is a mediocre starter in AAA who could fill in as an emergency starter but that's about it. Troy Patton is a quality young starting pitcher capable of being a #4 starter or even better if he can get his strikeout rate back up. Dennis Sarfate is a hopeless 26 year old reliever with no control. Michael Costanzo's a power hitting third baseman but has way too many swings and misses with below average fielding ability.

Other than Patton, there's not much value in this package going back to Baltimore. Still, the Astros have no need for another aging bat considering they already have Lee and Berkman and only have one decent starting pitcher. These barely B-level prospects are also pretty much all Houston had left in their farm system, thus robbing them of the chance to rebuild after Tejada's contract expires in two years. As for the Orioles, I think they could've gotten better value but at least they've finally decided to shut it all down and start fresh, something they've needed to do for nearly a decade.

The Mitchell Report (Pre-Release)

The essential purpose of this post is to allow me to say "I told you [insert name here] was using steroids" to everyone I know. While I hold this opinions strongly take into account that the beliefs disclosed in this article are based on previous data and testimony and in no way represent condemning evidence proving these players' guilt.

That being said, whose names can we possibly expect to see in the Mitchell Report?

To start: Brian Roberts, Jay Gibbons, Miguel Tejada and additional players from the 2004 Baltimore Orioles. This team has the unique distinction of having three confirmed steroid users for an entire season: Rafael Palmeiro, David Segui, and Jason Grimsley. Additionally, Grimsley explicitly named Roberts, Gibbons, and Tejada in his interrogation with federal investigators. There are major statistical anomalies in Roberts' career including his slugging percentage jumping 139 points from 2004 to 2005 and his hitting as many home runs in his first 295 at-bats in 2005 as he had in his previous 1502 at-bats before the 2005 season. While the other two players don't have such eye-raising discrepancies in their performances, I see no reason why Grimsley would have motivation to falsely accuse his former teammates.

Given the high degree of usage within this clubhouse it also wouldn't surprise me to see other players from this team listed. Javy Lopez and Melvin Mora are suspicions of mine given abnormally strong seasons during their stint with Orioles in this time period. Mora went from a career .249/.320/.388 hitter in 1438 at-bats to .331/.407/.539 hitter from 2004-2005 at the not so youthful age of 31. Lopez hit a miraculous 43 home runs (having hit 25 HRs or more only once before in his career) at the age of 32 for the Braves before coming to the Orioles the following year. Lopez' slugging percentage in his last season was 164 points higher than his previous career high.

As we saw with Palmeiro though, steroid use can alter performance in other facets or not at all. A high number of low-key players are likely to be exposed in the report; players who were barely making the cut and resorted to steroids but failed to improve significantly. Others may have prolonged their careers without substantially heightening their skills. This type of usage to extend one's career is suspected by a minority of fans--including myself--to have been exhibited by Roger Clemens.

The belief is that there is a conspiracy behind Clemens' delayed start to the 2006 season and was not due to his questioning retirement. Rather, some believe there was 50-day steroid suspension kept quiet by Major League Baseball. Clemens did sign his contract with the Astros 54 games into their season and if he had been caught, MLB could ill afford to allow such news to be leaked considering Clemens' near immortal status. This theory is based purely on speculation and coincidences that merely lack satisfying explanations (much like Jordan's departure from basketball after in 1993).

Stronger evidence lies in Clemens' remarkable ability to remain competitive at such an old age. His Cy Young worthy seasons from 2004-2006 may be attributable to his incredible work ethic, his relocation to the weakest division in baseball, or possibly cheating via steroids. The final corroborating fact however lies once again in the testimony of Jason Grimsley, who named Clemens in his report. Collectively, the circumstantial evidence and Grimsley's statement make for a compelling case for Clemens' steroid use.

I'm not calling for the damning of these players but merely voicing my speculations as to what I expect from the Mitchell Report on Thursday. Chances are there will few, if any, major players (pun not intended) exposed, but the report may very well provide a trail of drug usage across the league. The release of these names will hopefully give the public an idea of just how rampant this problem was and still is today.

Consistency and other interesting tid-bits...

I recently began reading the Hardball Times again and immediately found it rewarding. Here's a great piece by Sal Baxamusa on run scoring consistency.

For those of you without the stomach to endure the entirety of the statistically heavy article, it essentially breaks down the distribution of how runs are scored on a per game basis. A more powerful offense is not necessarily more consistent than a weak one, but a more consistent scoring pattern is beneficial regardless of how many runs you are scoring. Though this distribution of runs is often uncontrollable, it's interesting to see how the teams fared in the 2007 season.

One of the lesser focuses of this article, but is mentioned briefly, is the marginal utility of runs scored. The first graph depicts how useful each additional run is towards improving a team's overall record. Optimizing one's offense in accordance with this trend would potentially allow a team to maximize its winning percentage. I'm in the process of reforming and old data set to explore this possibility and will post in the coming days about the strategies that could be potentially derived from these trends.

Playoffs??!

Why is the NCAA still taking advice from Jim Mora, Sr.?



But seriously, the idea that we can determine the national champion this way is a joke. Now we should thank the BCS for the Texas-USC matchup of 2005; without the BCS, USC would have been relegated to a Rose Bowl match with Ohio State and would likely still be hailed by ESPN as the 'greatest team of all time.' In general, though, I would argue that we might as well go back to the old way of doing things and admit that there is no true national champion in college football. There's nothing wrong with that, besides the lack of intrigue. What we have now is a half-assed compromise, and one that most years, fails to meet its goal.

Of course, there is the other alternative - a 16-team playoff. I'm not going to spend a lot of time here arguing for it, but I will say that if the NCAA and the college presidents wanted to do it, they could. I believe solutions can be worked out (and have been) to many of the commonly mentioned problems. I once conceived of an 8-team playoff but this of course would be just as unfair to the smaller conferences as the current system. Therefore, an equitable 16-team playoff: 11 conference champions and 5 at-large berths.

So what would this bracket look like*?

1st round:

1. Ohio State - BIG 10 CHAMPION vs. 16. Florida Atlantic - SUN BELT CHAMPION
8. Kansas - At-Large vs. 9. West Virginia - BIG EAST CHAMPION
5. Georgia - At-Large vs. 12. Arizona State - At-Large
4. Oklahoma - BIG 12 CHAMPION vs. 13. BYU - MOUNTAIN WEST CHAMPION
6. Missouri - At-Large vs. 11. Florida - At-Large
3. Virginia Tech - ACC CHAMPION vs. 14. UCF - CONFERENCE USA CHAMPION
7. USC - PAC-10 CHAMPION vs. 10. Hawaii - WAC CHAMPION
2. LSU - SEC CHAMPION vs. 15. Central Michigan - MAC CHAMPION

Tons of great games in this bracket. A first-round match of Missouri vs. Florida. A potential Georgia vs. Oklahoma bout in round 2, with the winner perhaps facing Ohio State. USC-LSU in round 2, and a potential LSU-Virginia Tech re-match in the semifinal. Powerful mid-majors like Hawaii and BYU would get legitimate chances to spring upsets and Ohio State and LSU would be rewarded for great seasons (sorry Florida Atlantic and Central Michigan). Purely from the perspective of watching games, this bracket makes me salivate. I like the bowls, but they don't make me feel that giddy rush of excitement that I feel during March Madness.

And yes, the Illini are the last team out. Sigh.

*The bracket is constructed by ranking the teams according to where they stand in the BCS Rankings - the one exception being that Florida and Arizona State are switched to avoid an all-SEC Georgia-Florida match in Round 1. The ordering of teams 14-16 was at my discretion, but I don't think anyone would argue too much.

Breaking Down the Mega-Deal

The MLB off-season has had only one significant deal so far so let's take a look at what went down. For those not hitting the refresh tab of espn.com every 10 seconds, here are the players that were swapped:

Tigers receive: Miguel Cabrera, Dontrelle Willis
Marlins receive: Andrew Miller, Cameron Maybin, Mike Rabelo, Eulogio De la Cruz, Dallas Trahern, Burke Badenhop

Some of these name may be unfamiliar so a player by player breakdown would be nice to get an accurate sense of the value being exchanged.

Miguel Cabrera - One of the best hitters in the game at the youthful age of 24; probably one of the most coveted offensive weapons in the game.

Dontrelle Willis - Willis was considered a #1 starter in 2005 but since then has plummeted to the level of bottom of the rotation role on an AL squad. His WHIP continues to increase, his strikeout rate continues to fall, and his splits are becoming increasingly troubling. Over Willis' career right-handed batters are hitting .278 while lefties only .202, but last year those numbers spread further to .320 and .123 respectively. Statistically savvy managers can stack their lineups against Willis to take advantage of his weakness against righties. Chances of him rebounding are possible given his age, but the complexity of his windup and his moving to the better league present severe obstacles.

Andrew Miller - Miller is a top-notch pitching prospect who excelled in his 2007 stints in the minors. Miller had no business being in the majors last year, he tore up AA but struggled in his two AAA starts and had less than a year's experience in the Tigers' system. Despite his difficulties at the major league level, he still projects as a mid-to-front end of the rotation starter who is probably a year away from being an impact player.

Cameron Maybin - Maybin had played in six AA games when the Tigers gave him the starting job after they gave Craig Monroe to the Cubs. Another highly talented player who's still raw, Maybin has five tools that should be on display two years down the road. To say the Tigers rushed him through the system is an understatement; his value will grow tremendously if given the time to learn the ropes in the minors.

Mike Rabelo - A cheap backup quality catcher with experience working with young arms.

Eulogio De la Cruz - A fireballer who's worked both as a starter and a reliever. He's erratic and lacks a strong secondary pitch but still has a good shot of finding a role as a 7th-inning reliever or even a setup man.

Dallas Trahern - A mediocre sinkerballer who doesn't get a whole lot of strikeouts but keeps the ball on the ground. Chien-Ming Wang is perfecting the art of the one-pitch sinkerballer and while Trahern is not near Wang's quality, the development of a secondary pitch should let him sneak into the rotation at some point.

Burke Badenhop - Badenhop has dominated A ball and made three impressive starts in AA last year but at the age of 24 and a fastball that barely hits 91 mph his chances are limited. He's still been pitching as a starter, so the conversion to a reliever may allow for him to crack a major league roster eventually.

The Marlins got good value for Miggy and Willis: Two A-quality prospects, two B-quality prospects, a backup catcher, and an additional minor league arm. Presuming the Marlins are patient with Miller and Maybin, they should get a strong return on their investment.

The Tigers now hold one of the most potent offenses in the majors but are taking a big risk on Willis. While Cabrera's and Willis' ages make this deal not a simple future-for-present success swap, it's clear this organization is going to do all it can to win with its current crew--especially after their embarrassing loss in the World Series two years ago.

I'd feel comfortable making this deal from either end, though I think given Willis' level of risk, I would've preferred to have made this deal without having to give up more to include him. Then again, the Marlins may very well have been offering him at a discount rate given the growing speculations about his abilities. The Tigers immediately become a power-house in the AL while the Marlins have set themselves up for another World Series run two or three years down the road.