This is the fourth part of a six-part series in which I analyze each age group of draftees from 1995-2002.  In this one, I take a look at college sophomores.  I break down the first round picks into three groups: point guards, shooting guards/small forwards, and big men (power forwards/centers).  33 players were included in this study.

The main statistic I will be using to judge these players is PER.  PER, or Player Efficiency Rating, was developed by ESPN’s John Hollinger.  According to Hollinger, “Player Efficiency Rating is a rating of a player’s per-minute productivity.”  The league average is set at 15.  More information can be found here: http://www.alleyoop.com/prates.shtm.

For each pick, I calculated an expected PER.  For a #1 pick to be a success, he had to have a career PER of at least 16.8.  For a #2 pick, 16.6.  I subtracted .2 from each subsequent required PER, all the way down to pick #30 which needed a PER of 11 to be a success. I then took a look at the difference between what a player’s PER actually was and what a player of that pick should be expected to attain. 

            Five of the six players listed here were taken in the top-half of the draft.  The three highest picks – Davis, Bibby, and Billups – have all met the high expectations they faced when entering the league.  Dooling, selected 10th overall, has had a decent NBA career, but the Clippers were probably expecting more (side note: shouldn’t they have been concerned that his field goal percentage dropped 7% in his final year at Missouri?).  Avery had three very poor NBA seasons after two solid seasons at Duke, while Barkley only appeared in 27 games in his NBA career.

            A lot of big names here.  Iverson, Walker, Stackhouse, both Richardson’s, and Artest have all exceeded expectations.  Johnson and Butler are improving and will also eventually qualify as “successes.”  Miller, even though he has a negative difference, is a solid player as well.  Mercer and Jeffries were probably overrated coming into the draft.  Overall, sophomore shooting guards and small forwards don’t look like bad options.

            I had a difficult time classifying Iverson and Walker.  Iverson was drafted as a point guard and has been playing point guard lately, but for the bulk of his career he was an all-star shooting guard.  He doesn’t really fit into one of my categories.  The same can be said for Walker.  Although for most of his career he’s played at power forward, his style of play (slashing to the basket and launching three’s), especially with the Heat, convinced me to put him here.

            Generally disappointing.  Dalembert is actually considered the biggest success based on expectations, although Wallace and McDyess are both very good players.  One interesting thing this study has brought up is how we treat “busts.”  Joe Smith will always be the #1 pick who just couldn’t cut it, but in reality a guy like Samaki Walker is a much worse pick.  Smith may not be Shaq, but he’s had a long and productive career.  Walker, on the other hand, was taken 9th overall but played just 23 minutes last season.  Being the #1 overall pick in the NBA Draft may sound nice, but it leads to incredibly tough expectations.

That wraps up part four of the series.  Juniors are next and last (but not least) are seniors.

Information from thedraftreview.com and basketball-reference.com was used in this study.

Copyright © 2009 Basketball-Statistics.com