Revisiting my statistical projections as the last few prospects finish play. I decided it'd be interesting to compare statistically projected NBA impact to expected impact based on big board position to identify prospects my model is most "high" or "low" on relative to consensus.
High (lottery and potential-lottery)
Sengun: Model +6.9, big board consensus -1.1. Easily the biggest disagreement between statistical projection and consensus mock position I've ever seen. Sengun has the numbers of a clear #1 pick, but still sits in the mid first round of most mocks.
Cooper: Model +2.8, big board consensus -1.1. Relatively small sample size with him, but he has all the statistical markers of an offensive star PG.
Garuba: Model +1.9, big board consensus -0.7. Low-usage offensive players like Garuba aren't usually sexy picks, but he projects to be very good within his role.
Jackson: Model +1.2, big board consensus -1.2. Similar situation to Garuba in some ways...he's a pretty raw offensive prospect, but genuinely elite on D.
Springer: Model +1.5, big board consensus -0.5. Just a very solid all-around PG who's among the youngest players in the draft.
High (light sleepers)
McBride: Model +2.7, big board consensus -2.1. In many ways he's a younger version of Davion Mitchell...I'm a bit lost as to why he's not more highly regarded.
Prkacin: Model +1.3, big board consensus -2.0. Really promising offensive PF; think Deni last year but with more of a mean streak attacking the rim. Defensive question marks hold him back.
Robinson-Earl: Model +0.3, big board consensus -2.4. Just a winning player who seems likely to carve out a role and find a way to contribute no matter where he lands.
High (deep sleepers)
Liddell: Model +2.1, big board consensus -3.0. Liddell was extraordinarily productive for an NCAA sophomore, but doesn't have a clear fit in the NBA, and his early NCAA exit doesn't reflect well on him.
Diop: Model +1.2, big board consensus -3.0. Diop's under the radar playing limited minutes in the tough Spanish league, but projects to be a useful defensive energy guy.
Carr: Model +1.2, big board consensus -3.0. Carr had a rough go carrying a bad Minnesota team, but he's one of the most NBA-ready PGs and could thrive with more talent around him.
Justin Champagnie: Model +0.8, big board consensus -2.9. Both Champagnie twins are interesting, but Justin in particular was an interesting statistical outlier with his rebounding and defensive playmaking ability.
Garza: Model +0.8, big board consensus -2.9. He faces big questions about his defense, but the numbers suggest he's only mildly below average defensively for his position, and significantly above average offensively.
Jaquez Jr.: Model +0.6, big board consensus -3.0. His teammate Juzang got most of the attention, but UCLA's do-it-all wing has a much better statistical projection.
Grimes: Model +0.6, big board consensus -2.9. And elite 3-point shooter and an underrated defender. Should be an instant impact guy with some potential to keep improving.
Low (lottery and potential-lottery)
Cunningham: Model -1.1, big board consensus +4.5. He was a statistical outlier in many ways last year, for better and for worse. Statistically, the negatives outweigh the positives, at least for a high-lottery draft position.
Kispert: Model -4.4, big board consensus -0.3. An older prospect, his solid shooting projection is swamped by his massively negative projection in other areas and limited potential for development.
Green: Model -0.5, big board consensus +3.3. He didn't really stand out statistically, but this is a tricky projection because of his unusual team situation.
Suggs: Model -0.1, big board consensus +3.5. Suggs also had fairly pedestrian box score averages as he sat in cruise control for most of the season. He did have a way of raising his game in the rare instances when Gonzaga was threatened.
Keon Johnson: Model -1.8, big board consensus +1.5. Scouts love his athleticism, but he has a lot of work to do to reach his lofty ceiling, and the NBA isn't kind to SGs who can't pass or shoot at a high level.
Low (light sleepers)
Ziaire Williams: Model -3.8, big board consensus -1.3. It was an off shooting year for him, but the numbers suggest he has bigger problems than just a streaky jumper.
Duarte: Model -3.8, big board consensus -1.4. Duarte burst onto the scene as an older prospect, but he's unlikely to be anything more than a shooting specialist on offense, and his poor rebound numbers suggest a lack of defensive versatility.
Bouknight: Model -3.2, big board consensus -0.9. A scoring SG who just wasn't a very reliable scorer, and struggles to make a positive impact in the too-frequent event that his shot isn't falling.
