If Ainge picks Dragon Bender

[loco_91]

I don't really like Nowitzki or especially Love as comps. Best superstar comp imo, if you must make one, is Draymond Green. Obviously their bodies are way different but their skill sets are reasonably similar.

Well that's a scary comp since this Bender guy will most likely not share Green's handle or foot speed. So he's basically going to be a role player? So far all I keep hearing is 3 and D. Unfortunately the Celtics need a scorer.

How is this a negative comp? Draymond is a top 10 player. Draymond minus a bit of athleticism and plus 6 inches of height would be an exceptionally good outcome. I would pick that player #1 in a heartbeat. I don't think Bender will be that good, but it's a compelling upside comp.

[PickNRoll]

I don't really like Nowitzki or especially Love as comps. Best superstar comp imo, if you must make one, is Draymond Green. Obviously their bodies are way different but their skill sets are reasonably similar.

Well that's a scary comp since this Bender guy will most likely not share Green's handle or foot speed. So he's basically going to be a role player? So far all I keep hearing is 3 and D. Unfortunately the Celtics need a scorer.

How is this a negative comp? Draymond is a top 10 player. Draymond minus a bit of athleticism and plus 6 inches of height would be an exceptionally good outcome. I would pick that player #1 in a heartbeat. I don't think Bender will be that good, but it's a compelling upside comp.

Bender plays smaller than Draymond.  They have the same wingspan and Bender can't jump and is slower.  3 and D.  With average D.

[droopdog7]

I don't really like Nowitzki or especially Love as comps. Best superstar comp imo, if you must make one, is Draymond Green. Obviously their bodies are way different but their skill sets are reasonably similar.

Well that's a scary comp since this Bender guy will most likely not share Green's handle or foot speed. So he's basically going to be a role player? So far all I keep hearing is 3 and D. Unfortunately the Celtics need a scorer.

How is this a negative comp? Draymond is a top 10 player. Draymond minus a bit of athleticism and plus 6 inches of height would be an exceptionally good outcome. I would pick that player #1 in a heartbeat. I don't think Bender will be that good, but it's a compelling upside comp.

Bender plays smaller than Draymond.  They have the same wingspan and Bender can't jump and is slower.  3 and D.  With average D.

Bender has 6 inches on Draymond in standing reach, which is more important.  And that was last year, when Bender was 17. 

[PickNRoll]

I don't really like Nowitzki or especially Love as comps. Best superstar comp imo, if you must make one, is Draymond Green. Obviously their bodies are way different but their skill sets are reasonably similar.

Well that's a scary comp since this Bender guy will most likely not share Green's handle or foot speed. So he's basically going to be a role player? So far all I keep hearing is 3 and D. Unfortunately the Celtics need a scorer.

How is this a negative comp? Draymond is a top 10 player. Draymond minus a bit of athleticism and plus 6 inches of height would be an exceptionally good outcome. I would pick that player #1 in a heartbeat. I don't think Bender will be that good, but it's a compelling upside comp.

Bender plays smaller than Draymond.  They have the same wingspan and Bender can't jump and is slower.  3 and D.  With average D.

Bender has 6 inches on Draymond in standing reach, which is more important.  And that was last year, when Bender was 17.

Draymond is 6'7" and plays like he's 7'1".  Bender is 7'1" and plays like he's 6'7".

[mmmmm]

FWIW:  Just in time for the Ainge family to be in Israel scouting him, Bender played large minutes in this latest round of the IBSL playoffs (Maccabi FOX Tel Aviv vs Bnei Herzelia).  Maccabi won both games:

In Monday's game, Bender played 26 minutes off the bench.  He scored only 2 points (1 of 4 shooting including 0-2 from three), but grabbed 7 rebounds, blocked 2 shots and 1 steal.

In yesterday's game, Bender played 23 minutes off the bench, scoring 11 points (5 of 11 shooting including 1 of 6 from three), grabbed 7 rebounds again, dished 1 assist and blocked another shot. 

I don't know yet if Danny was in attendance for the game or not.  I only know he was headed there.

I'd love to find video of these recent games with extended minutes.

We'll have to wait until they release full game vids which probably won't happen for a while.

Here is the highlight vid for Monday's road game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QfOQlVPASY

Bender is on the floor for multiple plays, but since highlights are almost all offensive they don't show his 7 rebounds, blocks or steal, which were all defensive.  They do show his one made shot, which was with his foot on the arc, so was recorded as a 2PT shot.  Nice catch & shoot form, though.

Here are the highlights for Thursday's home game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt6I1VggMJA

Again, not a lot of highlights focused on Bender, as the only play of his that they show is at the 2:19 mark where he receives a pass in along the baseline just to the left of the hoop and as the defense collapses on him he does a nice dump assist to his teammate for the hoop.

Remember - these are vids made to highlight the team win for an Israeli audience and not to help Boston fans scout Bender.

[BitterJim]

I like the controversy this potential pick is causing.  Sounds like half the room would boo a Bender pick, and the other half would cheer.  What we do know is that the scouts are saying the sky is the limit for Bender.  For a man of his size, he has the highest upside in the entire draft.  At age 16 he went up against Porzingis and apparently dominated a guy who was at the time 1.5 years older and is now one of the top young big men in the NBA.

Here's a pretty cool discussion between Chad Ford and Pelton.

Pelton: Agreed on all counts regarding Bender and Porzingis. They're different players.
Bender has broader perimeter skills. We didn't see his playmaking much for Maccabi, given his limited role, but Bender's performance for Croatia in the 2014 FIBA U-18 European Championships is instructive. He averaged 4.9 assists, third among all players.
Because Porzingis was a year further along in his development, it's tough to compare the two players at the point they were drafted. But if we compare Bender to Porzingis in 2014, when Porzingis was the same age, the comparison is more reasonable -- and favorable to Bender.
His translated NBA winning percentage (the per-minute component of my wins above replacement player metric, or WARP) is .444. During 2013-14, Porzingis had a translated .389 winning percentage in the Spanish ACB. (He improved to .461 in 2014-15.)
As a result, Bender performs slightly better in my WARP projections, which factor in age and projected NBA performance. His 3.4 WARP projection is tied with Clint Capela for the best from a prospect in Europe since Ricky Rubio in 2009 (3.7), just ahead of Jusuf Nurkic (3.3), Porzingis (3.2) and Nikola Jokic (3.1).

According to statistical analysis, Pelton projects Bender to have a 3.5 WARP, second only to Ben Simmons in this year's draft.
https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4kpfrf/pelton_is_bender_a_better_prospect_than_porzingis/

So many layers of abstraction.  You take a game like basketball.  You can't adequately describe performance with just points, rebounds and assists, but it measures about half the game.  It gives you a rough idea.  Then you make composite stats that combine these basic stats in arbitrary ways.  If you have a high FG%, you'll have a high PER, and so on.  Then you translate composite statistics directly to wins.  That's clever.  Your model is leaking like the Titanic by now, but carry on.  Then you project it years into the future, and just for icing on the cake, apply it to European kids who have never started a game.

I don't think anyone, ESPECIALLY Pelton, would argue that this prediction in going to be fact.  Nothing will accurately predict how a player will develop and adapt to the NBA.  Not scouts (as you pointed out earlier), not stats, and definitely the opinion of a fan.

But here's the thing:  This model wasn't put together arbitrarily, as you seem to suggest.  It's created based on real-life players (empirical data).  It's never gonna be perfect (nothing is), but it's another tool in the tool chest

At this point, scouts and advanced stats seem to agree that he'll probably be a pretty good player in the league.  Could they be wrong?  Of course, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's not that crazy to think that it just might be a duck

[PickNRoll]

FWIW:  Just in time for the Ainge family to be in Israel scouting him, Bender played large minutes in this latest round of the IBSL playoffs (Maccabi FOX Tel Aviv vs Bnei Herzelia).  Maccabi won both games:

In Monday's game, Bender played 26 minutes off the bench.  He scored only 2 points (1 of 4 shooting including 0-2 from three), but grabbed 7 rebounds, blocked 2 shots and 1 steal.

In yesterday's game, Bender played 23 minutes off the bench, scoring 11 points (5 of 11 shooting including 1 of 6 from three), grabbed 7 rebounds again, dished 1 assist and blocked another shot. 

I don't know yet if Danny was in attendance for the game or not.  I only know he was headed there.

I'd love to find video of these recent games with extended minutes.

We'll have to wait until they release full game vids which probably won't happen for a while.

Here is the highlight vid for Monday's road game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QfOQlVPASY

Bender is on the floor for multiple plays, but since highlights are almost all offensive they don't show his 7 rebounds, blocks or steal, which were all defensive.  They do show his one made shot, which was with his foot on the arc, so was recorded as a 2PT shot.  Nice catch & shoot form, though.

Here are the highlights for Thursday's home game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt6I1VggMJA

Again, not a lot of highlights focused on Bender, as the only play of his that they show is at the 2:19 mark where he receives a pass in along the baseline just to the left of the hoop and as the defense collapses on him he does a nice dump assist to his teammate for the hoop.

Remember - these are vids made to highlight the team win for an Israeli audience and not to help Boston fans scout Bender.

49 minutes, no remarkable plays.  I have to give it to the kid for consistency.

My favorite play is at 1:46 of the first video where he jogs lazily down the court with his head down, gets pushed out of the way by a guy who's 3 inches shorter and gives up a dunk.

[PickNRoll]

I like the controversy this potential pick is causing.  Sounds like half the room would boo a Bender pick, and the other half would cheer.  What we do know is that the scouts are saying the sky is the limit for Bender.  For a man of his size, he has the highest upside in the entire draft.  At age 16 he went up against Porzingis and apparently dominated a guy who was at the time 1.5 years older and is now one of the top young big men in the NBA.

Here's a pretty cool discussion between Chad Ford and Pelton.

Pelton: Agreed on all counts regarding Bender and Porzingis. They're different players.
Bender has broader perimeter skills. We didn't see his playmaking much for Maccabi, given his limited role, but Bender's performance for Croatia in the 2014 FIBA U-18 European Championships is instructive. He averaged 4.9 assists, third among all players.
Because Porzingis was a year further along in his development, it's tough to compare the two players at the point they were drafted. But if we compare Bender to Porzingis in 2014, when Porzingis was the same age, the comparison is more reasonable -- and favorable to Bender.
His translated NBA winning percentage (the per-minute component of my wins above replacement player metric, or WARP) is .444. During 2013-14, Porzingis had a translated .389 winning percentage in the Spanish ACB. (He improved to .461 in 2014-15.)
As a result, Bender performs slightly better in my WARP projections, which factor in age and projected NBA performance. His 3.4 WARP projection is tied with Clint Capela for the best from a prospect in Europe since Ricky Rubio in 2009 (3.7), just ahead of Jusuf Nurkic (3.3), Porzingis (3.2) and Nikola Jokic (3.1).

According to statistical analysis, Pelton projects Bender to have a 3.5 WARP, second only to Ben Simmons in this year's draft.
https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4kpfrf/pelton_is_bender_a_better_prospect_than_porzingis/

So many layers of abstraction.  You take a game like basketball.  You can't adequately describe performance with just points, rebounds and assists, but it measures about half the game.  It gives you a rough idea.  Then you make composite stats that combine these basic stats in arbitrary ways.  If you have a high FG%, you'll have a high PER, and so on.  Then you translate composite statistics directly to wins.  That's clever.  Your model is leaking like the Titanic by now, but carry on.  Then you project it years into the future, and just for icing on the cake, apply it to European kids who have never started a game.

I don't think anyone, ESPECIALLY Pelton, would argue that this prediction in going to be fact.  Nothing will accurately predict how a player will develop and adapt to the NBA.  Not scouts (as you pointed out earlier), not stats, and definitely the opinion of a fan.

But here's the thing:  This model wasn't put together arbitrarily, as you seem to suggest.  It's created based on real-life players (empirical data).  It's never gonna be perfect (nothing is), but it's another tool in the tool chest

At this point, scouts and advanced stats seem to agree that he'll probably be a pretty good player in the league.  Could they be wrong?  Of course, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's not that crazy to think that it just might be a duck

I understand how models work.  Of course they're not factual.  When you have a model that is dead wrong as often as it is right, it ceases to have value.  As in, it has ZERO value.  It is as likely to grossly misinform your decision as it is to aid you.

Any model that claims to project the future NBA production of kids who play sparingly overseas is such a model.

[BitterJim]

I like the controversy this potential pick is causing.  Sounds like half the room would boo a Bender pick, and the other half would cheer.  What we do know is that the scouts are saying the sky is the limit for Bender.  For a man of his size, he has the highest upside in the entire draft.  At age 16 he went up against Porzingis and apparently dominated a guy who was at the time 1.5 years older and is now one of the top young big men in the NBA.

Here's a pretty cool discussion between Chad Ford and Pelton.

Pelton: Agreed on all counts regarding Bender and Porzingis. They're different players.
Bender has broader perimeter skills. We didn't see his playmaking much for Maccabi, given his limited role, but Bender's performance for Croatia in the 2014 FIBA U-18 European Championships is instructive. He averaged 4.9 assists, third among all players.
Because Porzingis was a year further along in his development, it's tough to compare the two players at the point they were drafted. But if we compare Bender to Porzingis in 2014, when Porzingis was the same age, the comparison is more reasonable -- and favorable to Bender.
His translated NBA winning percentage (the per-minute component of my wins above replacement player metric, or WARP) is .444. During 2013-14, Porzingis had a translated .389 winning percentage in the Spanish ACB. (He improved to .461 in 2014-15.)
As a result, Bender performs slightly better in my WARP projections, which factor in age and projected NBA performance. His 3.4 WARP projection is tied with Clint Capela for the best from a prospect in Europe since Ricky Rubio in 2009 (3.7), just ahead of Jusuf Nurkic (3.3), Porzingis (3.2) and Nikola Jokic (3.1).

According to statistical analysis, Pelton projects Bender to have a 3.5 WARP, second only to Ben Simmons in this year's draft.
https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4kpfrf/pelton_is_bender_a_better_prospect_than_porzingis/

So many layers of abstraction.  You take a game like basketball.  You can't adequately describe performance with just points, rebounds and assists, but it measures about half the game.  It gives you a rough idea.  Then you make composite stats that combine these basic stats in arbitrary ways.  If you have a high FG%, you'll have a high PER, and so on.  Then you translate composite statistics directly to wins.  That's clever.  Your model is leaking like the Titanic by now, but carry on.  Then you project it years into the future, and just for icing on the cake, apply it to European kids who have never started a game.

I don't think anyone, ESPECIALLY Pelton, would argue that this prediction in going to be fact.  Nothing will accurately predict how a player will develop and adapt to the NBA.  Not scouts (as you pointed out earlier), not stats, and definitely the opinion of a fan.

But here's the thing:  This model wasn't put together arbitrarily, as you seem to suggest.  It's created based on real-life players (empirical data).  It's never gonna be perfect (nothing is), but it's another tool in the tool chest

At this point, scouts and advanced stats seem to agree that he'll probably be a pretty good player in the league.  Could they be wrong?  Of course, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's not that crazy to think that it just might be a duck

I understand how models work.  Of course they're not factual.  When you have a model that is dead wrong as often as it is right, it ceases to have value.  As in, it has ZERO value.  It is as likely to grossly misinform your decision as it is to aid you.

Any model that claims to project the future NBA production of kids who play sparingly overseas is such a model.

Sure.  Scouts are wrong more often then they're right.  Models are wrong more often than they're right.  So should we just ignore the and not talk about the draft? Or just go off of nothing?

It's entirely possible that all the scouts and stats are wrong. But that doesn't mean that they're useless: if they were, they wouldn't be used. 

The draft is a crapshoot, and it always will be.  In the absence of some better analysis solution, I tend to listen to the draft experts and advanced stats.  It may steer me wrong, but just ignoring everything will, too

[mctyson]

Darko was taken over 13 years ago.  I don't see how the comparison even fits.
Just because Darko was European and a 7 footer?

Darko was skilled guy who just simply wasn't athletic enough to maximize that skill.  He also didn't have the right mentality to become a "superstar."  He could have been a very solid role player on the right team, and he wasn't drafted by that team.

We have to think of Bender in a similar way.  From what I can see the kid has plenty of skill.  He also looks to be fairly athletic for a young guy at 7 feet.  Those are very good qualities to have in a top-5 draft pick.  The question is:  will be be allowed to develop into the appropriate type of NBA player he can be, and does he have the mindset to maximize his ability?

I can say without question that if Danny drafts him, the answer to the first part of that question is a resounding YES.  There have been very few, if any, draft picks during his tenure that failed to develop under Doc or Brad Stevens.  The only one I can really think of is Gerald Green, and he wasn't here for that long any way.

But Danny, Brad, or the team have no ability to affect Bender the person.  If he is not mentally or emotionally capable of becoming and NBA pro and working to maximize his talents, he will be a failure.  This is true of every draft pick, but it has to be the primary concern when you are drafting 18 year olds who have little-to-no playing time to evaluate.

[PickNRoll]

I like the controversy this potential pick is causing.  Sounds like half the room would boo a Bender pick, and the other half would cheer.  What we do know is that the scouts are saying the sky is the limit for Bender.  For a man of his size, he has the highest upside in the entire draft.  At age 16 he went up against Porzingis and apparently dominated a guy who was at the time 1.5 years older and is now one of the top young big men in the NBA.

Here's a pretty cool discussion between Chad Ford and Pelton.

Pelton: Agreed on all counts regarding Bender and Porzingis. They're different players.
Bender has broader perimeter skills. We didn't see his playmaking much for Maccabi, given his limited role, but Bender's performance for Croatia in the 2014 FIBA U-18 European Championships is instructive. He averaged 4.9 assists, third among all players.
Because Porzingis was a year further along in his development, it's tough to compare the two players at the point they were drafted. But if we compare Bender to Porzingis in 2014, when Porzingis was the same age, the comparison is more reasonable -- and favorable to Bender.
His translated NBA winning percentage (the per-minute component of my wins above replacement player metric, or WARP) is .444. During 2013-14, Porzingis had a translated .389 winning percentage in the Spanish ACB. (He improved to .461 in 2014-15.)
As a result, Bender performs slightly better in my WARP projections, which factor in age and projected NBA performance. His 3.4 WARP projection is tied with Clint Capela for the best from a prospect in Europe since Ricky Rubio in 2009 (3.7), just ahead of Jusuf Nurkic (3.3), Porzingis (3.2) and Nikola Jokic (3.1).

According to statistical analysis, Pelton projects Bender to have a 3.5 WARP, second only to Ben Simmons in this year's draft.
https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4kpfrf/pelton_is_bender_a_better_prospect_than_porzingis/

So many layers of abstraction.  You take a game like basketball.  You can't adequately describe performance with just points, rebounds and assists, but it measures about half the game.  It gives you a rough idea.  Then you make composite stats that combine these basic stats in arbitrary ways.  If you have a high FG%, you'll have a high PER, and so on.  Then you translate composite statistics directly to wins.  That's clever.  Your model is leaking like the Titanic by now, but carry on.  Then you project it years into the future, and just for icing on the cake, apply it to European kids who have never started a game.

I don't think anyone, ESPECIALLY Pelton, would argue that this prediction in going to be fact.  Nothing will accurately predict how a player will develop and adapt to the NBA.  Not scouts (as you pointed out earlier), not stats, and definitely the opinion of a fan.

But here's the thing:  This model wasn't put together arbitrarily, as you seem to suggest.  It's created based on real-life players (empirical data).  It's never gonna be perfect (nothing is), but it's another tool in the tool chest

At this point, scouts and advanced stats seem to agree that he'll probably be a pretty good player in the league.  Could they be wrong?  Of course, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's not that crazy to think that it just might be a duck

I understand how models work.  Of course they're not factual.  When you have a model that is dead wrong as often as it is right, it ceases to have value.  As in, it has ZERO value.  It is as likely to grossly misinform your decision as it is to aid you.

Any model that claims to project the future NBA production of kids who play sparingly overseas is such a model.

Sure.  Scouts are wrong more often then they're right.  Models are wrong more often than they're right.  So should we just ignore the and not talk about the draft? Or just go off of nothing?

It's entirely possible that all the scouts and stats are wrong. But that doesn't mean that they're useless: if they were, they wouldn't be used. 

The draft is a crapshoot, and it always will be.  In the absence of some better analysis solution, I tend to listen to the draft experts and advanced stats.  It may steer me wrong, but just ignoring everything will, too

Nah, that's not what I meant.  I meant this specific model is crap and it's useless at worst and N/A at best.

e.g. How many points, rebounds and assists did a player put up?  OK, that's useful.  It's a guideline.  Oh, you say Bender rode pine all year on a veteran team so his numbers aren't representative?  OK, that's fine too.  I buy it.  I guess basic stats and modeling won't work for Bender.

But when a guy comes with a model that projects Bender's 4 points and 2 rebounds into NBA production, that's just BS.  Translated NBA Winning Percentage?  Better than Porzingis?  Gimme a break.  I promise you there is no model based on game stats that can reliably predict the "winning percentage" of an end-of-the-bench European player who scores 4 points.

If you want to talk to me about a model for Kris Dunn and Denzell Valentine's output based on hundreds of college games, OK.  I'm listening.

[clevelandceltic]

I like the controversy this potential pick is causing.  Sounds like half the room would boo a Bender pick, and the other half would cheer.  What we do know is that the scouts are saying the sky is the limit for Bender.  For a man of his size, he has the highest upside in the entire draft.  At age 16 he went up against Porzingis and apparently dominated a guy who was at the time 1.5 years older and is now one of the top young big men in the NBA.

Here's a pretty cool discussion between Chad Ford and Pelton.

Pelton: Agreed on all counts regarding Bender and Porzingis. They're different players.
Bender has broader perimeter skills. We didn't see his playmaking much for Maccabi, given his limited role, but Bender's performance for Croatia in the 2014 FIBA U-18 European Championships is instructive. He averaged 4.9 assists, third among all players.
Because Porzingis was a year further along in his development, it's tough to compare the two players at the point they were drafted. But if we compare Bender to Porzingis in 2014, when Porzingis was the same age, the comparison is more reasonable -- and favorable to Bender.
His translated NBA winning percentage (the per-minute component of my wins above replacement player metric, or WARP) is .444. During 2013-14, Porzingis had a translated .389 winning percentage in the Spanish ACB. (He improved to .461 in 2014-15.)
As a result, Bender performs slightly better in my WARP projections, which factor in age and projected NBA performance. His 3.4 WARP projection is tied with Clint Capela for the best from a prospect in Europe since Ricky Rubio in 2009 (3.7), just ahead of Jusuf Nurkic (3.3), Porzingis (3.2) and Nikola Jokic (3.1).

According to statistical analysis, Pelton projects Bender to have a 3.5 WARP, second only to Ben Simmons in this year's draft.
https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4kpfrf/pelton_is_bender_a_better_prospect_than_porzingis/

So many layers of abstraction.  You take a game like basketball.  You can't adequately describe performance with just points, rebounds and assists, but it measures about half the game.  It gives you a rough idea.  Then you make composite stats that combine these basic stats in arbitrary ways.  If you have a high FG%, you'll have a high PER, and so on.  Then you translate composite statistics directly to wins.  That's clever.  Your model is leaking like the Titanic by now, but carry on.  Then you project it years into the future, and just for icing on the cake, apply it to European kids who have never started a game.

I don't think anyone, ESPECIALLY Pelton, would argue that this prediction in going to be fact.  Nothing will accurately predict how a player will develop and adapt to the NBA.  Not scouts (as you pointed out earlier), not stats, and definitely the opinion of a fan.

But here's the thing:  This model wasn't put together arbitrarily, as you seem to suggest.  It's created based on real-life players (empirical data).  It's never gonna be perfect (nothing is), but it's another tool in the tool chest

At this point, scouts and advanced stats seem to agree that he'll probably be a pretty good player in the league.  Could they be wrong?  Of course, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's not that crazy to think that it just might be a duck

I understand how models work.  Of course they're not factual.  When you have a model that is dead wrong as often as it is right, it ceases to have value.  As in, it has ZERO value.  It is as likely to grossly misinform your decision as it is to aid you.

Any model that claims to project the future NBA production of kids who play sparingly overseas is such a model.

Sure.  Scouts are wrong more often then they're right.  Models are wrong more often than they're right.  So should we just ignore the and not talk about the draft? Or just go off of nothing?

It's entirely possible that all the scouts and stats are wrong. But that doesn't mean that they're useless: if they were, they wouldn't be used. 

The draft is a crapshoot, and it always will be.  In the absence of some better analysis solution, I tend to listen to the draft experts and advanced stats.  It may steer me wrong, but just ignoring everything will, too

Nah, that's not what I meant.  I meant this specific model is crap and it's useless at worst and N/A at best.

e.g. How many points, rebounds and assists did a player put up?  OK, that's useful.  It's a guideline.  Oh, you say Bender rode pine all year on a veteran team so his numbers aren't representative?  OK, that's fine too.  I buy it.  I guess basic stats and modeling won't work for Bender.

But when a guy comes with a model that projects Bender's 4 points and 2 rebounds into NBA production, that's just BS.  Translated NBA Winning Percentage?  Better than Porzingis?  Gimme a break.  I promise you there is no model based on game stats that can reliably predict the "winning percentage" of an end-of-the-bench European player who scores 4 points.

If you want to talk to me about a model for Kris Dunn and Denzell Valentine's output based on hundreds of college games, OK.  I'm listening.

Im starting to think you hate Bender more than anything you have ever hated in life. I wonder when you will spread a little of the hate to other players.

[sahara]

Dude must be a real tough guy if he can bend dragons. I wonder what´s his real name.. Must be something anonymous like Bruce Wayne or Conan the Destroyer.

[Denis998]

I like the controversy this potential pick is causing.  Sounds like half the room would boo a Bender pick, and the other half would cheer.  What we do know is that the scouts are saying the sky is the limit for Bender.  For a man of his size, he has the highest upside in the entire draft.  At age 16 he went up against Porzingis and apparently dominated a guy who was at the time 1.5 years older and is now one of the top young big men in the NBA.

Here's a pretty cool discussion between Chad Ford and Pelton.

Pelton: Agreed on all counts regarding Bender and Porzingis. They're different players.
Bender has broader perimeter skills. We didn't see his playmaking much for Maccabi, given his limited role, but Bender's performance for Croatia in the 2014 FIBA U-18 European Championships is instructive. He averaged 4.9 assists, third among all players.
Because Porzingis was a year further along in his development, it's tough to compare the two players at the point they were drafted. But if we compare Bender to Porzingis in 2014, when Porzingis was the same age, the comparison is more reasonable -- and favorable to Bender.
His translated NBA winning percentage (the per-minute component of my wins above replacement player metric, or WARP) is .444. During 2013-14, Porzingis had a translated .389 winning percentage in the Spanish ACB. (He improved to .461 in 2014-15.)
As a result, Bender performs slightly better in my WARP projections, which factor in age and projected NBA performance. His 3.4 WARP projection is tied with Clint Capela for the best from a prospect in Europe since Ricky Rubio in 2009 (3.7), just ahead of Jusuf Nurkic (3.3), Porzingis (3.2) and Nikola Jokic (3.1).

According to statistical analysis, Pelton projects Bender to have a 3.5 WARP, second only to Ben Simmons in this year's draft.
https://www.reddit.com/r/bostonceltics/comments/4kpfrf/pelton_is_bender_a_better_prospect_than_porzingis/

So many layers of abstraction.  You take a game like basketball.  You can't adequately describe performance with just points, rebounds and assists, but it measures about half the game.  It gives you a rough idea.  Then you make composite stats that combine these basic stats in arbitrary ways.  If you have a high FG%, you'll have a high PER, and so on.  Then you translate composite statistics directly to wins.  That's clever.  Your model is leaking like the Titanic by now, but carry on.  Then you project it years into the future, and just for icing on the cake, apply it to European kids who have never started a game.

I don't think anyone, ESPECIALLY Pelton, would argue that this prediction in going to be fact.  Nothing will accurately predict how a player will develop and adapt to the NBA.  Not scouts (as you pointed out earlier), not stats, and definitely the opinion of a fan.

But here's the thing:  This model wasn't put together arbitrarily, as you seem to suggest.  It's created based on real-life players (empirical data).  It's never gonna be perfect (nothing is), but it's another tool in the tool chest

At this point, scouts and advanced stats seem to agree that he'll probably be a pretty good player in the league.  Could they be wrong?  Of course, but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's not that crazy to think that it just might be a duck

I understand how models work.  Of course they're not factual.  When you have a model that is dead wrong as often as it is right, it ceases to have value.  As in, it has ZERO value.  It is as likely to grossly misinform your decision as it is to aid you.

Any model that claims to project the future NBA production of kids who play sparingly overseas is such a model.

Sure.  Scouts are wrong more often then they're right.  Models are wrong more often than they're right.  So should we just ignore the and not talk about the draft? Or just go off of nothing?

It's entirely possible that all the scouts and stats are wrong. But that doesn't mean that they're useless: if they were, they wouldn't be used. 

The draft is a crapshoot, and it always will be.  In the absence of some better analysis solution, I tend to listen to the draft experts and advanced stats.  It may steer me wrong, but just ignoring everything will, too

Nah, that's not what I meant.  I meant this specific model is crap and it's useless at worst and N/A at best.

e.g. How many points, rebounds and assists did a player put up?  OK, that's useful.  It's a guideline.  Oh, you say Bender rode pine all year on a veteran team so his numbers aren't representative?  OK, that's fine too.  I buy it.  I guess basic stats and modeling won't work for Bender.

But when a guy comes with a model that projects Bender's 4 points and 2 rebounds into NBA production, that's just BS.  Translated NBA Winning Percentage?  Better than Porzingis?  Gimme a break.  I promise you there is no model based on game stats that can reliably predict the "winning percentage" of an end-of-the-bench European player who scores 4 points.

If you want to talk to me about a model for Kris Dunn and Denzell Valentine's output based on hundreds of college games, OK.  I'm listening.

Im starting to think you hate Bender more than anything you have ever hated in life. I wonder when you will spread a little of the hate to other players.

Hate is too weak of a word to be used on Bender.

[Scintan]

Ainge has had pretty good success projecting the guys further away (i.e. high schoolers), so I'll give the pick the benefit of the doubt for a while.