2015 Celtics Draft Picks

[Silent Chief]

Wow it is dead in here.  I thought for sure there would be more chatter about the picks, and not a single thread yet for any of them.
 
Came to share at least one link.  This Rozier kid is growing on me;  http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/columnists/gregg-doyel/2015/05/28/doyel-terry-rozier-listens-voice-head/28093211/

 

[bakahump]

I only follow the celts on a cursory basis.....but I am confused.
 
Another "not very offensive" (or rather bad shooting) point guard?  So we go from Rondo to Smart to Rozier.....
 
And Rozier doesnt even seem to be able to distribute like Rondo and Smart can.
 
Ainge and co. do understand that guys who play 15 or more feet from the basket should be able to score from that same distance right?
 
This may be the best choice possible. As I say...I am certainly not an expert on todays NBA.  But can someone give me a brief explanation why it might be?
 
Is this shoe drop one to trading Smart?
 
I do like the  Hunter......seems like he has an amazingly smooth, fluid and quick release.

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

A lot of over reaction and rush to judgement when it's pretty obvious that another shoe is going to drop.  I don't get all the hand wringing over something that clearly is not finished yet.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

All I keep reading is how Rozier is this awful perimeter shooter when his primary scoring troubles were at the rim. He has decent technique and a very soft touch on his jumper. You can't simply look at a shooting pct and determine "he can't shoot" without digging much deeper. Rozier was moved from off the ball as a freshman (where he shot 38% from 3.....could he shoot that year?) to more of a playmaking/ballhandling role which is an adjustment with more responsibilities. If you only look at college shooting pct you would determine that Bradley Beal, he of his 31% 3-point pct at FL......couldn't shoot either.

For the nineteenth thousandth time the drafting of 20-year olds ISN'T based off their PRODUCTION as a 19-year old......it IS based on their PROJECTION as a 25-year old. Rozier may or may not make it in this league......he's like a ton of players drafted last night especially in the mid-1st......but to ignore the upside of his shooting based on a number rather than his technique, rotation, and soft touch is shortsighted.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

But a guy on TV said he couldn't shoot and we always trust what the guys on ESPN say, right?

 

[Cellar-Door]

Looking through Rozier's stats and scouting. I think he can shoot, the questions will be whether he can finish at the rim, and whether he's going to have to play mostly SG, which with his size is probably a problem. I like him as a player, I just don't at all see the fit for him on the roster.
Hunter has a clear fit, though the question will be if he is starter quality or a second bench scorer.
The two second rounders are probably getting stashed, but of them I like Mickey. He's super-raw offensively, and needs work on everything but shot blocking defensively, but he's a very good athlete with really good rim protection skills for his size.
 
I'd think there is a trade coming to clear out some of the guard backlog. I'd like to see Christian Wood get a summer league invite, I know attitude and maturity are concerns, but he's talented, and maybe going undrafted is the kick in the ass he needs.

 

[EL Jeffe]

Eventually I talk myself into every draft pick, even Fab Melo (and I HATED Fab Melo).
 
I do feel better about Rozier than I did last night and I do think he has a chance of being a quality NBA player. It's just disappointing going from Winslow to Rozier. In any event, Rozier does have stuff going for him. He's an explosive, quick twitch athlete in a way that Smart & Bradley aren't. He can defend, he's tough and he competes. He could easily be an energy 3rd guard and that's not bad for #16. If he genuinely does have playmaking skills, than it's easy to dream on him becoming a Lowry/Bledsoe/Teague type. The problem is obviously he didn't really showcase that at Louisville. As HRB aptly pointed out last night, part of that is the Louisville system where they turned every game into a rock fight. I'm happy to wait and see on Rozier. His floor isn't bad because he does have some transferable skills. His ceiling will mainly depend on his playmaking ability.
 
Hunter was one of my favorite prospects and I actually liked him better than Booker. I would have been happy with him at #16, so #28 was good value. He shoots the hell out of the ball and is crafty enough to create his own offense despite being limited athletically. I don't buy the Klay Thompson comps because I don't think he'll defend as well...in fact I'm not sure who he'll defend. He has long arms that allowed him to create some havoc at a lower level of competition, but in the NBA, he's a little slow laterally and has little strength. My other concern is a low shot release; will he be able to get his shot off cleanly? NBA defenders close out really quickly and a low release could be trouble. He's a skilled offensive player though (he's a pretty good passer with vision) and could carve out a Mike Miller type career. 

 

[slamminsammya]

We shouldn't ask about fit on a roster when probably no one on the current roster figures into any future championship contender. Its all about collecting valuable pieces right now.

 

[nighthob]

But a guy on TV said he couldn't shoot and we always trust what the guys on ESPN say, right?

His shot charts don't inspire confidence. He's not very effective from anywhere on floor. Well, except for mid range shots from the right side. The exact opposite of what you want your guards to do. On the other hand he can dribble, unlike Bradley, and play hellacious defense at the PG spot, as Bradley used to. So he looks like a long term Bradley replacement.

 

[Cellar-Door]

We shouldn't ask about fit on a roster when probably no one on the current roster figures into any future championship contender. Its all about collecting valuable pieces right now.

Well yes and no.
The problem with roster fit right now isn't skills based (so for example you obviously draft a good offensive C with bad rim protection even if it isn't a great roster fit), it is with position which is more of a problem. Unless they plan to make a trade they are going to have real difficulty getting all of their guards the minutes they need. If you can't give your players experience against NBA competition they don't gain value, and may even lose value.
Right now there are 96 minutes of guard time available per game.
let's add 14 minutes of time at the SF when the team goes small.
They need to fit the following into that 110 minute space:
Smart
Bradley
Thomas
Young
Rozier
Hunter
Turner
Pressey.
 
Obviously Pressey is likely to be cut, and we can hope (but probably in vain) for Turner, but still that is a lot of players for not many minutes.
 

His shot charts don't inspire confidence. He's not very effective from anywhere on floor. Well, except for mid range shots from the right side. The exact opposite of what you want your guards to do. On the other hand he can dribble, unlike Bradley, and play hellacious defense at the PG spot, as Bradley used to. So he looks like a long term Bradley replacement.

 
The mid-range could be good shots, it is hard to tell from the chart. Long 2s are bad shots, but the elbow jumper when defenders go under the screen is one of the most important shots for primary ball handlers in the pick and roll offense. So if he excells there (he'll need to do it on both sides) it is a big step in the right direction.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Is a s&t with Cleveland for Kevin Love possible, should love want out?

 

[DJnVa]

http://www.celticslife.com/2015/06/history-approves-making-sense-of-rozier.html
 

 So what I want to do is to look at all the non-lottery point guards who were selected in the first round in the last 10 years, and see how their NBA careers panned out.

So that's a list of 29 players in 10 years. Only 20% of them may be considered as "busts",

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Well yes and no.
The problem with roster fit right now isn't skills based (so for example you obviously draft a good offensive C with bad rim protection even if it isn't a great roster fit), it is with position which is more of a problem. Unless they plan to make a trade they are going to have real difficulty getting all of their guards the minutes they need. If you can't give your players experience against NBA competition they don't gain value, and may even lose value.
Right now there are 96 minutes of guard time available per game.
let's add 14 minutes of time at the SF when the team goes small.
They need to fit the following into that 110 minute space:
Smart
Bradley
Thomas
Young
Rozier
Hunter
Turner
Pressey.

I don't think it's a huge problem for next year. Pressey will be cut, Hunter and Rozier will be riding the shuttle; and if Young can force the issue, that's a good thing (and hopefully will mean fewer monutes fot Turner).

By the tome Rozier is ready to play, Turner and others will be gone.

 

[RG33]

Ainge and co. do understand that guys who play 15 or more feet from the basket should be able to score from that same distance right?
 
This may be the best choice possible. As I say...I am certainly not an expert on todays NBA.  But can someone give me a brief explanation why it might be?

I think it comes down to the fact that outside of the top 5-6 picks in each draft, it is a complete and utter crapshoot (and the top 5-6 can be as well some years). At #16 and especially at #28, you are just looking for someone with at least one elite skill that should be translatable to the NBA. Rozier is an elite defender. Hunter is an elite shooter. Mickey is an elite shot blocker. The other parts of their game need a lot of work, but they are worth taking flyers on based on being elite at something. Some may develop and improve the other skillsets enough to become NBA regulars or even stars, but I think it is a better strategy than drafting "solid guys" who will almost always end up being JAGs 3 years later.

 

[nighthob]

Actually the hope is that guys with at least one elite skill in the crap shoot of the draft actually become JAGs, as opposed to the guys without an elite skill that become stars in Europe.

 

[SoxJox]

Is a s&t with Cleveland for Kevin Love possible, should love want out?

Love has already opted out, but rumors are already in the air that it's likely he re-signs with the Cavs.

 

[Devizier]

Actually the hope is that guys with at least one elite skill in the crap shoot of the draft actually become JAGs, as opposed to the guys without an elite skill that become stars in Europe.

 
Yep, we're looking for a James Jones here.
 
Draymond Green, Michael Redd, and Ben Wallace are remarkable because those examples are so damned rare. 

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Don't know about you guys, but I hate the 'win some games, try to make the tournament' outcome even more now that the draft has played out.  This team needed to lose 65 or so games last year; it's ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Don't know about you guys, but I hate the 'win some games, try to make the tournament' outcome even more now that the draft has played out.  This team needed to lose 65 or so games last year; it's ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

What could they really have done though? I guess not make the Thomas trade? except he's a clear asset going forward, and you need some of those to build a team.
They traded their nominal two best players, they gave significant minutes to Evan Turner, they then started giving minutes to players who couldn't get minutes for Detroit. Outside of actually throwing games on purpose, there isn't much to be done

 

[nighthob]

Don't know about you guys, but I hate the 'win some games, try to make the tournament' outcome even more now that the draft has played out.  This team needed to lose 65 or so games last year; it's ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

If they'd lost three more we'd be rooting for a team with Marcus Smart and Justise Winslow on the wings.

 

[moondog80]

If they'd lost three more we'd be rooting for a team with Marcus Smart and Justise Winslow on the wings.

What should they have done differently? Demand that Stevens lose games? Then we'd be looking for a new coach. Instead, he now has more credibility to command authority over his players, and he's looked at as more of an asset to prospective FA. That's no small thing.

 

[Cellar-Door]

If they'd lost three more we'd be rooting for a team with Marcus Smart and Justise Winslow on the wings.

Well that would be a fun team to watch not score any points.

 

[lovegtm]

What should they have done differently? Demand that Stevens lose games? Then we'd be looking for a new coach. Instead, he now has more credibility to command authority over his players, and he's looked at as more of an asset to prospective FA. That's no small thing.

It's always been a little weird to me that Stevens, who by all accounts really wishes he had more talent to work with, can't find a way to lose a couple more games at the end of the year and stay in the lottery. It's not like 35-47 with this roster lowers his value as a coach very much relative to 40-42. 
 
Put another way: I think Pop finds a way to miss the playoffs in the same situation. I'm not sure why Stevens should get credit for being marginally competitive when it hurts his own interests a lot going forward.
 
I think a team like Utah had a way better case for trying to perform as well as they could in the 2nd half this year, since they had just discovered they had a potentially franchise-changing piece (Gobert), and needed to evaluate what they had, in competitive situations. I don't think anyone, Stevens included, thought the Celtics were at that stage in their timeline.

 

[moondog80]

It's always been a little weird to me that Stevens, who by all accounts really wishes he had more talent to work with, can't find a way to lose a couple more games at the end of the year and stay in the lottery. It's not like 35-47 with this roster lowers his value as a coach very much relative to 40-42. 

 
 
Because they play hard.  That's the mentality.  Hopefully,it pays dividends down the road.
 
Stevens isn't an idiot.  He knew why they traded Green and Rondo, and presumably was fine with it.  But for the guys who are still here, all young guys for the most part, establishing a culture is important.  If that means they draft a guy who is 3% likely to be a star instead of 8%, so be it.  

 

[nighthob]

What should they have done differently? Demand that Stevens lose games? Then we'd be looking for a new coach. Instead, he now has more credibility to command authority over his players, and he's looked at as more of an asset to prospective FA. That's no small thing.

This is what they're selling, but they're selling it because they have no other options. They don't have any quality NBA starters on their roster. They have one prospect that looks like he will get there, and then a bunch of guys that should never be starting games for a contender. That's a real tough sell for free agents interested in winning. It's an attractive situation for retreads looking to pad their numbers in hopes of getting a better deal someplace else, though.

 

[TheRooster]

I can't wait until Winslow is a bust.  I don't expect that to be the case, but clearly there are a number of guys who get paid >$1M to evaluate basketball players who don't love him as much as some of you.
 
Regarding the C's, I believe last night's draft makes trading Bradley, Young, Thomas and perhaps even Smart possible.  If you need to package two of those guards with one of the young PFs and a draft pick for a cornerstone, you've got something left to develop with said cornerstone.  If you somehow manage to sign a different cornerstone as a FA, well then you pick between the redundant guards and trade the ones you least like for pennies on the dollar.  The night was unspectacular progress.  The breakthrough (i.e. the acquisition of the stud/allstar/cornerstone) will have to wait.

 

[wutang112878]

Looking at just the draftees:
 
Rozier - I just dont know what to make of him right now.  I saw something where Austin Ainge said something to the effect of him really being more of a 2 than a 1 but being asked to be the 1 at Louisville.  I wouldnt be surprised if thats why they think he will be a better pro than college player because they wont ask him to play out of position.  Even still, I'm not sure what his ceiling is maybe Ricky Davis?  But he's also undersized.  Its not that I hate him because there is clearly some skill there but I'm just not sure what to make of him.
 
Hunter - His outside shooting is just a skill that we do not have whatsoever.  If he can show that his 3pt shooting last year was an abberation and get back to the career arc he showed in his first 2 college seasons then we might really have something and he would fill a huge hole for us.
 
Mickey - all I can think of is JaJuan Johnson and I wish we could have somehow jumped in front of Houston and taken Montrezl Harrell who I could see being an effective energy / rebounder off the bench and if you get a guy like that in the 2nd round you are doing very well.
 
Thornton - I just dont understand choosing yet another guard.  With Smart, Young, Bradley, Rozier, and Hunter you already have a logjam of flawed guys so why not just take a chance on a big even if you think he faces longer chances than Thornton of being an NBA player.

 

[moondog80]

This is what they're selling, but they're selling it because they have no other options. They don't have any quality NBA starters on their roster. They have one prospect that looks like he will get there, and then a bunch of guys that should never be starting games for a contender. That's a real tough sell for free agents interested in winning. It's an attractive situation for retreads looking to pad their numbers in hopes of getting a better deal someplace else, though.

 
I agree it's not ideal.  But again, what's the alternative?  The only way around it was to command Stevens to lose games.  Which would piss off the best asset we have and ruin the culture he's created.  All to move up 6 spots (they weren't going to get anywhere near Philly or LA) and get a player who has maybe 5 extra shots out of 100 to become a star.  Is that what you would have done?
 
From 2010-2014, these guys were picked 2nd:
Jabari Parker
Victor Oladipo
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
Derrick Williams
Evan Turner
 
These guys were picked 3rd:
Joel Embiid
Otto Porter
Bradley Beal
Enes Kanter
Derrick Favors
 
So no, I'm not devastated that we didn't tank the second half so we could pick 10th.

 

[JohnnyTheBone]

 
I agree it's not ideal.  But again, what's the alternative?  The only way around it was to command Stevens to lose games.  Which would piss off the best asset we have and ruin the culture he's created.  All to move up 6 spots (they weren't going to get anywhere near Philly or LA) and get a player who has maybe 5 extra shots out of 100 to become a star.  Is that what you would have done?
 
From 2010-2014, these guys were picked 2nd:
Jabari Parker
Victor Oladipo
Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
Derrick Williams
Evan Turner
 
These guys were picked 3rd:
Joel Embiid
Otto Porter
Bradley Beal
Enes Kanter
Derrick Favors
 
So no, I'm not devastated that we didn't tank the second half so we could pick 10th.

 
Damn, Moondog, that's a great post.  I happen to agree with you 100%.  Play hard and win, at all times.

 

[Sprowl]

Damn, Moondog, that's a great post.  I happen to agree with you 100%.  Play hard and win, at all times.

For what does it profit a team to gain the #10 draft pick and forfeit its soul?

 

[Koufax]

Drinking again Sprowl?

 

[lovegtm]

 
I agree it's not ideal.  But again, what's the alternative?  The only way around it was to command Stevens to lose games.  Which would piss off the best asset we have and ruin the culture he's created.  
 

I 100% agree that commanding Stevens to lose games would piss him off. And again, I get what he is trying to do, and I think he's really really good at it, and that the Celtics are lucky to have him as a coach.
 
I just wish he could show a little more creativity in gaming the system. Because while it's true that a top 5 (or 10) pick is no guarantee of anything, the fact remains that the league as a whole values top 5 picks extraordinarily highly (as we saw on draft night), which in turn gives you a ton more team-building options if you have those picks and are willing to give them away. 
 
History is littered with brilliant tacticians who were meh strategists.

 

[jscola85]

The team did all they could to move up.  Can't blame them for trying.  You can, however, blame them for reaching dramatically to get Rozier.  My guess is they had pegged Oubre as their pick, then Washington leapfrogged them and they scrambled.  They probably wanted Oubre and then were going to target Rozier later, but got worried he'd be gone and didn't have a good backup plan, so they just took the guy they liked.  I can get that but it's a misuse of your #1 resource entering the draft.
 
The draft will be determined more by what they do from now than the specific players they picked.  It's a huge problem for this team if they have Smart, Bradley, Thomas, Rozier, Hunter and Young all on the roster by September.  Just too many duplicative players there and if we are still in rebuild mode, not enough minutes for Smart, Rozier, Hunter and Young to all develop properly.
 
If we wake up a month from now and Smart has been used to get a key piece like Cousins or another big, and Ainge also reels back Pierce and one other FA piece, suddenly this draft doesn't look so silly.  Right now though it looks like Ainge took the Sam Hinkie route, except instead of centers we decided to stockpile the least valuable asset in basketball - undersized shooting guards.

 

[jscola85]

FWIW, I want to give Ainge the benefit of the doubt because his picks in the 10-25 range have all turned into productive NBA players eventually.  Banks, Jefferson, West, Allen, Green, Rondo, Bradley, Sullinger, Olynyk - all of them solid NBA players.  The only whiff Ainge has on his record with a top-25 pick is Fab Melo.  So based on that track record, I suspect Rozier will have a solid NBA career.  Just unlikely he turns into much more than most of the aforementioned guys - ie, a rotation guy, maybe a 4th or 5th starter.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

My comment was about people here who were happy that they were winning the games; I think we've had the debate about tanking vs not and people are in whatever camp they are in.
 
I've said a good outcome for them was playing hard every night and usually losing by 1 point.  I think the draft demonstrated why that would have been better, especially because a lot of the guys here now won't be around when the winning attitude matters

 

[Kliq]

I'm all in on RJ Hunter, let's get crazy! The last shot is unreal:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgnIpXYyXlM

 

[nighthob]

I agree it's not ideal.  But again, what's the alternative?  The only way around it was to command Stevens to lose games.  Which would piss off the best asset we have and ruin the culture he's created.  All to move up 6 spots (they weren't going to get anywhere near Philly or LA) and get a player who has maybe 5 extra shots out of 100 to become a star.  Is that what you would have done?
 

I said a while ago and I'll say it again, if Ainge had it to do over again I wager that he wouldn't make the Thomas deal. It would have been cheaper to spend an extra first on draft night than what he was offering to get into the NBA Starter tier of the draft. Also, to be blunt, the whole "culture of winning" thing is boob bait for the fans. The reality is that maybe one or two guys on the present roster will still be here when they contend again. With a very high likelihood that none of them are. The "culture of winning" arrives with your all stars.

 

[moondog80]

I said a while ago and I'll say it again, if Ainge had it to do over again I wager that he wouldn't make the Thomas deal. 

 
 
No way.  Thomas is the type of player you hope to get in the draft.    If you look at the 2nd overall picks in the past 15 years, 3 players picked there have been better (Durant, Aldridge, Chandler).  That's 20%.  And no way they were getting anywhere near the 2nd pick.
 
I'd love to have picked 10th and gotten Justise Winslow.  But the fact is, he's very unlikely to become an all star.  The rosy projection for him seems to be Luol Deng.  Who is a nice player, but if Ainge traded for the actual Luol Deng (instead of someone who has a less than 50% chance to become him), people would be very underwhelmed.  

 

[nighthob]

It's a nice try cherrypicking the cursed spot. But Oladipo is already better and going to lengthen that lead over the years. Thomas can't stop a fart in a hurricane defensively. He's a bench scorer. No matter where he ranks amongst bench scorers, teams find those players in the draft every single year. There's a reason that despite the scoring he's always available.

If Ainge hade the option of #10 and paying the LA and Cleveland pick for Thomas, or drafting in no man's land this year, I think he'd rather go into next year with Winslow and Thomas rather than Thomas and three new bodies for the Portland Red Claws.

 

[radsoxfan]

If Ainge hade the option of #10 and paying the LA and Cleveland pick for Thomas, or drafting in no man's land this year, I think he'd rather go into next year with Winslow and Thomas rather than Thomas and three new bodies for the Portland Red Claws.

 
I generally agree that if Danny knew Winslow would fall to #10, and he knew trading for IT would cause them to go from the 10th pick to the 16th pick, he might reconsider.  Obviously hindsight is 20/20.
 
But it's important to remember there is no reason to assume Thomas was just permanently available.  He was being shopped at the time, but there is a chance the Suns reconsider and don't want to trade him in the offseason.  Maybe they end up dealing Bledsoe if they have IT. Maybe IT flourishes without Dragic. Maybe another team steps in with a better offer. A lot of other things could have happened.
 
If Danny thought the deal for IT was a good move for the future, I don't think he had the luxury of waiting til the offseason and assuming he would be able to get him again if he just threw in an extra minor asset. You have to strike when opportunity arises sometimes. 

 

[TheJodyReedExperience]

Thomas can't stop a fart in a hurricane defensively.

To be fair, this sounds insanely difficult.

 

[amfox1]

Jonathan Holmes will join the Celtics' summer league teams.  Holmes, the 6'8" Texas forward, was thought to be in the 28/33 mix but went undrafted.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Keep him away from Wonderland station, please.

 

[bowiac]

Per Layne Vashro (my go-to for prospect analytics), the top comps for Rozier:
 

 
And here's Hunter: 
 

 

[snowmanny]

He gives the Celtics (along with the Grizzlies and the Jazz) an "F" grade for their draft.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Per Layne Vashro (my go-to for prospect analytics), the top comps for Rozier:
 

 
And here's Hunter: 
 

I wish his tool allowed multi-year comps. Rozier's 2014 comps are totally different, and include Tony Delk, Boobie Gibson, Dion waiters and Avery Bradley, I wonder what a combined years comp would look like. Hunter's 2013 and 2014 comps include some of the same players. Other interesting additions are: Korver, Paul George, Wesely Person, Ray Allen, and Kevin Martin.
 
Some of the variety is probably because age is weighted heavier than anything else, so multi year players don't get compared to 1 and dones unless you go back a year or two.
 
Also interesting: Marcus Thornton's 2013 and 2014 seasons end up with Damian Lillard seasons in the top 10 (2nd in 2014, 3rd in 2013).

 

[Devizier]

Wondering how these projections have looked historically?
 
I've always thought about doing this with mock draft boards, but never had the time. Plus Chad Ford keeps editing his.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

I wish his tool allowed multi-year comps. Rozier's 2014 comps are totally different, and include Tony Delk, Boobie Gibson, Dion waiters and Avery Bradley, I wonder what a combined years comp would look like. Hunter's 2013 and 2014 comps include some of the same players. Other interesting additions are: Korver, Paul George, Wesely Person, Ray Allen, and Kevin Martin.
 
Some of the variety is probably because age is weighted heavier than anything else, so multi year players don't get compared to 1 and dones unless you go back a year or two.
 
Also interesting: Marcus Thornton's 2013 and 2014 seasons end up with Damian Lillard seasons in the top 10 (2nd in 2014, 3rd in 2013).

 
This speaks to the challenge of doing statistical comps, really.   It's an interesting thing to look at, but some people overrate the value of it 'because it uses numbers' as best I can tell.   Nate Silver, who pioneered the approach so far as I am aware, was always quite cautious about the limits of it.  This is not to say we shouldn't look, obviously, we should be aware of the large error bars (as demonstrated by the above changes year to year)

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Vague collegiate statistical comps playing with/against different rules than the NBA while playing against competition employing a variety of schemes not allowed in the NBA. How could these numbers possibly be inaccurate?

 

[bowiac]

Vague collegiate statistical comps playing with/against different rules than the NBA while playing against competition employing a variety of schemes not allowed in the NBA. How could these numbers possibly be inaccurate?

"Inaccurate" isn't a particularly meaningful term in these discussions. The old statistics refrain is that "all models are flawed. Some model are useful."
 
Yes, it's going to be "inaccurate." But it can be still be illuminating, even if it misses a lot of variables. That said, while they're fun, I do think comps tend to be less "useful" than other forms of stat analysis. They make it easier to understand that Vashro's model doesn't especially like Rozier, but there are other tools available which are more granular in that respect.
 

Wondering how these projections have looked historically?
 
I've always thought about doing this with mock draft boards, but never had the time. Plus Chad Ford keeps editing his.

Vashro publishes "retrodictions", using these projections methods to look at historic players based on the information available at the time. For instance, this is all players before this year, sorted by highest percent chance to be a star:
 

 
I find this useful, but your mileage may vary. You  gotta dig around - predicting Shaq was gonna be a star isn't really a value added.