@mikegrib8 Yea, a few team ppl said the same. Should’ve worked him into the article. But duarte’s +1.5 relative age for hs class vs yaxel’s -0.7 relative age for hs class (and unique background) tells us something about the scouting prior. (Duarte also worse archetype as small SG)
(1/3) Yaxel Lendeborg is one of the strangest NBA Draft cases in recent memory:
- outlier age 👴
- outlier stat production 📈
- came out of nowhere after playing at the JuCo level 👨🎓
For atypical cases like Yaxel, the NBA Draft market is more likely to be wrong. My analysis 👇
Nik writes some of the best draft analysis from a betting POV, and he makes a lot of interesting points in this about why Yaxel’s age/high school pedigree shouldn’t weigh nearly as much in his projection as many people think. Check it out!
In honor of Harper’s incredible postseason play, the answer to “why was Rutgers so bad with Harper?”
- Ace’s biggest strengths are overvalued
- nobody else on the team was good enough for the high bar that is Big Ten competition
- Harper had an unlucky injury/illness stretch
Not an NBA guy, but it seems Harper in the Finals has brought back "how was 2024-25 Rutgers so bad" discourse.
Easy.
They brought in (or retained, in Williams' case) three extremely high-usage on-ball options and then added two Just-A-Shooters to stand around.
No connectivity.
Before the draft last year I wrote about how Harper’s strength, length, and craft boded well for his ability to develop into a star offensive initiator in the NBA:
https://t.co/UYAvHIMc91
Dylan Harper’s combination of strength, agility, and understanding leverage to power through Lu Dort is like a veteran NFL edge defender with an elite speed-to-power move rushing the passer
@ItsATerp_CBB@BuckAnalytics If putback and transition opportunities are way higher efficiency than halfcourt wouldn’t we expect to see this trend based on those alone? Not to mention high-assist offenses also resulting in this trend based on play type definitions
@BuckAnalytics@bballstrategy@matthewwinick Is this adjusted for the cumulative impact of the individual players or no? I.e. is this the residual on top of the sum of player impact metrics or is it the raw net rating of lineups? The former would be more informative
@Colin_Hanley1 Adjusted for opponent strength how exactly? BPM 2.0 already has a built-in adjustment for opponent strength. Wouldn’t that be double-counting? That would explain why the AdjBPM values you have are outside the usual range
@jackruhanen Did you do any validation on whether the more aggressive adjustment for adj team eff is more predictive?
What do you mean by more aggressive adjustment for player age?