Top 5 Draft Picks In Consecutive Years: Full Chart

Top 5 Draft Picks In Consecutive Years: How Much Does The Team Improve?

Oh, what could have been.


Is having a top 5 pick in consecutive years enough to get a team moving in the right direction?  The table below shows best and worst turnarounds for teams that meet the aforementioned criteria.  There have been 44 instances of this in the lottery era; I have counted only the teams that got the top 5 pick by virtue of their record, not the teams who got the pick in a trade.  However, there were only few instances where a team got a top 5 pick from a trade, as most first round picks are lottery-protected.  The columns on the table are Team, Years With Top 5 Picks, the team record before its first top 5 pick and the team record after the second top 5 pick, and the improvement made after the second consecutive top 5 pick.



The best turnarounds are highlighted by the 2009-2010 Seattle/OKC Thunder; KD and Russell Westbrook were joined by James “Philly Beard” Harden and they have become a lethal combination.

Orlando had Shaq and Penny in consecutive years; that duo led them to an NBA Finals appearance.  If they stayed together, who knows what would have happened.  Two others teams that fit into the Orlando category are the ’95 Mavericks and the ’97 T-Wolves.

The Mavs had Jimmy Jackson and Jamal Mashburn, who were a part of the worst turnaround in the lottery era.  However, when Jason Kidd got there in ’94 they seemed to be at the beginning of a great era in Dallas, but those three just couldn’t get along.  In Minnesota, Stephon Marbury couldn’t understand that he and KG were going to be a force to be reckoned with for the next ten years.  With the exception of the ’93 Nets, who were destroyed by John Starks’ flagrant foul on Kenny Anderson, the common thread is the egos of the young stars got in the way of potential powerhouses.   FULL CHART

Related Post:


The Deepest Draft Classes Since 1981. (Part 4)

Here are the remaining tidbits from “deepest draft class” study. Sorry for the data dump; there was so much interesting data about the NBA Draft.  For the in-depth year-by-year stats click HERE.

PART 1  PART 2  PART 3

The Deepest Draft Classes Since 1981. (Part 2)

1997’s Top Pick, Not Much Else After Him.

PART 3.      Now that we’ve gone through the best overall draft classes, it’s time to go a little deeper.  Here are the worst overall draft classes:





Notable Observations:
(Here’s the rating system:   Each draft class that leads the league, during a given season, in number of top 50 players gets 5 points, the second and third place classes get 3 points, and the fourth and fifth place classes are given 1 point.  Remember, this study is attempting to find out the deepest draft classes, not the most top heavy. )
The 1997 and 2000 drafts were the worst of the past 30 years; they couldn’t muster one top 5 season between the two of them.  
’06, ’07, ’09, and ’10 are on this list, but probably don’t deserve to be there; at least for now.  These classes haven’t fully developed yet; more on that later.

The ’86 draft class did a lot better than I thought.  Before this study, I would have picked them to be the worst.

Here are two other interesting tables.




The Deepest Draft Classes Since 1981. (Part 3)

In continuation of the “deepest draft” series, here is the career progression of the average draft class.  It measures the number of top 50 players the average draft class has at different points of the draft’s career.  For example:  The average draft class has 5.7 top 50 players in its sixth season.  PART 4  
The chart below will also be used to compare the 2004-2010 draft classes to the average draft class.  A score above 1.00 says that the draft class being measured is better than the average draft class at the same point of the draft cohort’s career.  The 2008 Draft Class is the only one on the list that has outperformed the average draft class so far.  D-Rose, Kevin Love, and Russell Westbrook are among the gems of the 2008 class.
PART 1       PART 2

The Deepest Draft Classes Since 1981. (Complete Chart)

Here’s the rating system:   Each draft class that leads the league, during a given season, in number of top 50 players gets 5 points, the second and third place classes get 3 points, and the fourth and fifth place classes are given 1 point.  Remember, this study is attempting to find out the deepest draft classes, not the most top heavy. 

The Deepest Draft Classes Since 1981. (Part 1)



The Number One Pick?
The 2011 Draft class seems to be one of the weakest in a long time; but which classes were the strongest?  The following series of charts and articles(PART 2,  PART 3, PART 4) will be an attempt to determine the answer.  The depth of each draft class from 1981 to 2010 was measured by the number of players they placed in the top 50 during each season of their career.  The top 50 players are measured by minutes played; while this measure may seem inadequate, it is probably the best measure of talent that can be used to compare one large group of players to another large group of players.  I understand the limitations of using minutes played; comparing one player to another player using only minutes played would be idiotic, but large groups smooth out the differences in minutes played that are due to coaching preferences, team injury situations, and other distortions of talent evaluation.  Another thing to mention about the method is that the draft classes from 2006-2010 cannot be really measured accurately, as their careers are still unfolding.  The results from those years should be disregarded.

Here’s the rating system:   Each draft class that leads the league, during a given season, in number of top 50 players gets 5 points, the second and third place classes get 3 points, and the fourth and fifth place classes are given 1 point.  Remember, this study is attempting to find out the deepest draft classes, not the most top heavy.  Click HERE to get in-depth, year-by-year stats.

For The Complete Chart 1981-2010, Click HERE
I think the 1984, 1996, and 2003 drafts had the best top talent, but were they the deepest?  The table shows the top ten draft classes since 1981.  On this table is total points (explained earlier), number of times the class led the league, the year the class had its best season and how many top 50 players it had that year, and what season of its career did the class peak.


Notable Observations:

Most of the best draft classes seem to have the ability to simultaneously take over the league from their predecessors and prevent the younger classes from pushing them from the top.
Two NBA Finals’ MVPs

The class of ’98, who had to wait until January ’99 to start their lockout-shortened rookie year, did pretty well for themselves and did not peak until their 11th year. The average class peaks around their 6th or 7th season, then the younger classes start to take over. Once you get past one of the worst number one picks in NBA history, Michael Olowokandi, it was a really good draft. Dirk Nowitzki, Paul Pierce, Antawn Jamison, Vince Carter, and Rashard Lewis were all drafted that year; and there were at least 5 or 6 more good players drafted in 1998.

And With The Third Pick…

Class of ’84: Jordan, Olajuwon, Barkley, and Stockton: The greatest player; a top 2 or 3 center; an undersized, versatile, rebounding machine, all-time great power forward; and the NBA’s all-time leader in steals and assists. Don’t be fooled by the top heaviness; there were some other good players in this draft: Big Smooth Sam Perkins, Steal Machine Alvin Robertson and even great coach, but not-so-great player Rick Carlisle. I don’t want to turn this into a list of the 1984 draftees, but you get the idea.

The 1992 class was very interesting:  Shaq, Zo, Spree, and others were in this draft, but that’s not the interesting part – this class(as a whole) peaked after only its 3rd season.


We’ll Miss You.

The class of ’96 is one of my favorites; Kobe, Iverson, Ray Allen, Steve Nash, and the undrafted Ben Wallace highlight this class.




What A Class, But Where’s AI? PART 2




PART 2   PART 3

Related Posts:

Game 7 In The NBA Playoffs: Home-Court Advantage Is Overstated. (Filipino Version)

Tulad ng NBA playoffs ay puspusan, duda walang ikaw ay pagdinig dose-dosenang mga clichés hagis sa paligid sa pamamagitan ng mga commentators. Ang pinaka-nanggagalit klisey ay na ang mga bahay ng koponan ay nanalo Game 7 ng serye karamihan ng oras. Since 1991, ang tahanan ng koponan ay 36-10, isang .783 porsyento manalo. stat na ito ay palaging nagdala up nang hindi ilagay sa tamang konteksto; bilang kung sabihin sa pagkakaroon ng Game 7 sa bahay nagiging sanhi ng isang team na manalo. Gayunman, hindi ko na marinig ang isang komentarista sa banggitin na ang team na may bahay-hukuman kalamangan ay may isang mas mahusay na rekord at karaniwang ay ang mas mahusay na koponan anyway. Gusto One inaasahan sa kanila na manalo ng isang Game 7 sa bahay o sa kalye. Sa artikulong ito, ako ay subukan upang malaman kung gaano karaming mga Game 7s ay won sa pamamagitan ng mga koponan ng bahay higit sa lahat dahil sila ay sa bahay. 
Ang talahanayan sa ibaba sumusubok na makakuha ng mga sagot sa naunang tanong.Ang mga pangunahing saligan ng talahanayan ay na ang mga mas kalsada nanalo may mga sa isang serye, mas mababa ang bahay-hukuman bentahe bagay. hiwalay ko 1-4 Games Games mula sa 5-7 dahil ang huling tatlong laro ng isang serye ay karaniwang mas malubha kaysa sa unang apat at bahay-hukuman bagay bahagyang, ngunit pa rin mas malaki sa huling tatlong laro. Since 1991, sa Games 1-4 ang kalye team wins 32% ng oras habang sa Games 5-7 daan ang nanalo 25% ng oras. I rate, sa isang apat na point scale, ang probabilidad ng mga home team winning Game 7 higit sa lahat dahil ang mga ito sa bahay. Ang apat na kinalabasan ay: Oo, malamang mangyari, nagdududa, at Hindi. Ito ay scale malayo sa perpekto, ngunit ito ay lilitaw sapat na upang tapusin na Game 7 bahay-hukuman kalamangan ay overstated
Narito ang dalawang halimbawa ng kung paano table ang gumagana: Ang 2004 serye sa pagitan ng Miami at New Orleans ginawa kalye walang panalo, kaya ito ay magiging ligtas na sabihin na ang home team won Game 7 dahil sa mga bentahe home hukuman; Ang 2003 serye Detroit-Orlando ginawa ng dalawang nanalo kalye, Detroit winning na Game 7 ay mas malamang dahil sa kanila sa pagiging isang mas mahusay na team kaysa dahil sa bahay-hukuman bentahe. Ang talahanayan sa ibaba ay nagpapakita ng mga labing isang serye unang-round na napunta sa Game 7 dahil ang unang round pinalawak na sa 2003.


                                                                First Round:
Ang tahanan ng koponan won 9 ng 11 Game 7s, ngunit kung paano marami sa mga nanalo 9 ay higit sa lahat dahil sa bahay-hukuman bentahe? Ayon sa mesa, lamang 5 ng 9 nanalo ay hindi bababa sa maaaring dahil sa mga bahay-hukuman kalamangan lamang. Na nangangahulugan na ang 4 ng 9 wins bahay-team marahil ay walang kinalaman sa bahay-hukuman bentahe. Home-hukuman bentahe, hindi bababa sa unang round ng playoffs, tila lubos na overstated.


 

                                               Conference Semi-Finals:
                               
Ang tahanan ng koponan won 17 ng 23 Game 7s, ngunit kung paano marami sa mga 17 nanalo ay higit sa lahat dahil sa bahay-hukuman bentahe? Ayon sa mesa, lamang ng 11 ang 17 ay nanalo ng hindi bababa sa maaaring dahil sa mga bahay-hukuman kalamangan lamang. Iyon ay nangangahulugan na 6 ng 17 wins bahay-team marahil ay walang kinalaman sa bahay-hukuman bentahe. Home-hukuman bentahe sa Conference Semifinals ‘Game 7s, lumilitaw na overstated, tulad ng ito ay sa unang round ng playoffs.



                                            Conference and NBA Finals:

Ang tahanan ng koponan won 10 ng 12 Game 7s, ngunit kung paano marami sa mga 10 nanalo ay higit sa lahat dahil sa bahay-hukuman bentahe? Ayon sa mesa, lamang 6 sa 10 wins ay hindi bababa sa maaaring dahil sa mga bahay-hukuman kalamangan lamang. Na nangangahulugan na ang 4 sa 10 wins bahay-team marahil ay walang kinalaman sa bahay-hukuman bentahe. Home-hukuman kalamangan sa mga Conference at NBA Finals ‘Game 7s, lumilitaw na overstated, tulad ng ito ay sa unang round at conference semifinals ng playoffs.


Related Posts:





Dallas-Miami Game 5: A Rare Offensive Show In The Finals.

In tonight’s Game 5, Dallas and Miami both shot at least 50% from the field; this feat has been accomplished only 4 other times since the 1991 Finals.  This was a beautiful game to watch; it was more about great shooting than about poor defense.  Oddly enough, every one of the other instances involved the Lakers; it’s probably just a product of them making the Finals seemingly every other year.
Related Posts:

The NBA Playoffs: Does Defense Really Improve? (Part 2 of 3)

Disregard this article; it needs to be corrected. Sorry for the bad link.


This is the second part of a three-part series on defense in the NBA Playoffs.  We often hear from NBA analysts that defense improves, or at least intensifies between game 82 of the regular season and Game 1 of the playoffs.  It seems intuitive enough, the playoffs start and there’s a lot to play for: pride, fame, and winning the ‘chip.  The table below compares and contrasts defensive performance in the regular season and the playoffs during the 1990s.  The two metrics used in this comparison are Pace (Possessions Per 48 Minutes) and Offensive Rating (Points Per 100 Possessions).

For the 1990’s as a whole, the pace of the game slowed down by 4.0% in the playoffs, and the Offensive Rating decreased by 1.7%.  This result shows that there were fewer points scored in the playoffs, mostly because of the slower pace being compounded by the decrease in offensive rating.

Notables Facts About The 1990s:

Unlike the 1980s, there was evidence of defense becoming better in the playoffs in the 1990s.  The pace in the playoffs slowed down by 4% in 1990s, more than the 3.5% in the 1980s.  While the 1980s’ playoff offensive efficiency was no different than the regular season, the playoff offensive efficiency during the 1990s decreased by a small, but significant 1.7%.

The regular season pace decreased in 9 of 10 years in the 1990s.  Anyone who watched the NBA in 1990s knows that when the Bad Boy Pistons came to prominence, the league became progressively slower and a great deal of physical play was allowed until the “Derek Harper rule was instituted.(Unofficially around ’97 or ’98 and than officially in 2001)

Only two years in the 1990s saw an increase in offensive rating during the playoffs; those increases were only .1% and .2%.  Part 1



Related Posts: