Production Vs. Potential: Decision-Making at the NBA Draft

It's NBA draft season and, as such, it's also prediction season for NBA fans, pundits, and front offices. There are two basic ways to go about predicting future success in the NBA: the scouting approach and the numbers-based statistical approach. Preferably, these two approaches work in concert with one another, as numbers alone often leave out important context. Scouting alone, through film study or watching games and workouts, is not enough, either, as human beings are guilty of all manner of cognitive biases, which statistical analysis can help mitigate against.

Two of the more interesting prospects in the 2014 NBA Draft, due to the divergence in opinion of their draft stock between the numbers-leaning crowd and the more scouting-focused set, are UCLA shooting guard Jordan Adams and his fellow former-Bruin point-forward Kyle Anderson. Draft Express currently has both slotted in the early-to-mid 20s, while ESPN's Chad Ford pegs Adams closer to the very end of the first round, with Anderson in the early 20s.

Being drafted in the first round of the NBA, with its guaranteed millions, is a blessing for any basketball player and certainly nothing to sneeze at, but it's possible that the scouts are significantly short-changing Anderson and Adams.

Just about every single draft model based in part or primarily on college statistics predicts Adams as one of the five best players in this year's draft. Kevin Pelton of ESPN.com projects Adams as the fifth-best prospect. Models from Andrew Johnson and Jacob Frankel both rate Adams as the draft's best prospect. Layne Vashro's very in-depth model likes both players in the top three of this draft, minus international prospects. Frankel and Johnson have Anderson in the top three and seven, respectively, while Kevin Pelton's WARP model is the only number-crunching method that has Anderson outside the lottery in terms of talent at No. 16.

Both Anderson and Adams suffer from similar flaws in the eyes of scouts, while bringing similar strengths from a numerical perspective. Both players are bound to the ground with neither possessing even average leaping ability. They both lack explosion on their first steps and, as such, scouts worry about their ability to get into the teeth of the defense at the next level. In spite of this, however, both fill the stat sheet in just about every way in which you could hope, but, in particular, each player grabs a lot of steals, which has been shown over and over again to be the most valuable single statistic for predicting which college and overseas players will transition well to the NBA level. It's also fairly good as a quick-and-dirty heuristic for judging who the most impactful players are once in the Association.

The other common characteristic that Anderson and Adams share is that they each possess impressive wingspans. When you watch them both, they are, over and over again, able to use their length and overall size to make crafty plays to effect the game positively.

Incredibly, UCLA had a third wing player on its roster last season who is also likely to end up a first-round draft pick this year in Zach LaVine. LaVine's case is, essentially, a mirror image of his teammates. Every statistical model I cited above believes he is not among the 20 best players in this year's draft. But when you watch LaVine on a basketball court, he just looks like an NBA player.

I mean, here just watch this:

HOLY SHIT, right? 40-plus-inch verticals, windmill dunks, and step back jumpers, oh my!

LaVine has reportedly been killing it in pre-draft workouts and has quickly risen up to the lottery in the Draft Express mock draft, while Chad Ford has him at No. 18, though still several spots ahead of his more accomplished teammates.

Several people have sounded like they're trying to contain themselves when I asked about LaVine's workouts. He's MURDERED all of them.

— Hardwood Paroxysm (@HPbasketball) June 22, 2014

The story of these UCLA players is, in many ways, the story of the NBA draft. There are a fair number of players in the draft who are pretty good bets to be at least decent NBA players, like Adams and Anderson. But there are very few players with the TREMENDOUS UPSIDE POTENTIAL® of a guy like Zach LaVine.

Due to the importance of star-power in the NBA, teams will almost always swing for the fences on a guy like LaVine before taking the (better) odds of a single or double in Adams and Anderson. Apologies in advance for dropping baseball metaphors all over your basketball talk.

Enjoy the draft.