Defining playing style for the 2017 NBA Draft’s wing prospects

The NBA is rapidly evolving. Big men are being replaced by wings as teams downsize their frontcourts to take advantage of spread pick-and-roll schemes and maximize their chances of defending opposing small ball lineups. The traditional bigs that remain have been forced to diversify their skill sets by adding 3-point shots and learning to defend on the perimeter.

The changing dynamics are creating an increased need for wings on NBA rosters while making big men seemingly more expendable as the supply of traditional frontcourt players outpaces the demand for them. In season transactions help reflect the trend to some degree as 18 of the 38 players called up from the D-League in 2016-17 could be classified as wings.

The rising demand for these types of players creates a call for deeper dives into the NBA Draft prospects who might help fill those roles in the future. Whether they are lottery picks, late first-rounders or second-round sleepers, nearly every available wing requires examination given that NBA teams are often playing three of them at the same time.

Read More: Bam Adebayo is too limited to warrant a first round selection

To help do that, I’ve created profiles for the 30 shooting guard or small forward college prospects who appear either on our Big Board or in the DraftExpress top 100. These so-called personality tests follow in the tradition of Seth Partnow’s work on NBA point guards at Nylon Calculus and Ian Levy’s adaptation of those tests for point guard prospects in the 2016 NBA Draft. Unfortunately, international prospects are not included as the required data for some of the four measures was not accessible for them.

The four measures for determining the wing profile are:

• Creation (Unassisted FGM + Assists per 100 possessions): Using possession data from Hoop Lens and shot data from Hoop-Math, I calculated how many unassisted field goals each player made per 100 possessions this season. By adding assists to that equation, we get a rough measure of how often the player was either creating offense for himself or for his teammates. The league’s elite wings are elite because of their ability to create their own offense and make plays with the ball in their hands.
• Spacing (3PA per 100 possessions): Having wings who can shoot is vitally important to making modern day spread offenses work. If you need proof of that, go back and watch how the Houston Rockets defended Andre Roberson in the opening round of the 2017 playoffs. While how often a player actually converts 3-pointers obviously matters, prior research has shown the willingness to take them has a floor spacing effect, which is why we are using attempts here.
• Involvement (True Shooting Attempts + Assists + Turnovers per 100 possessions): There’s a bit of overlap between this measure and the creation metric, but ultimately we’re interested in figuring out just how much of a team’s offensive possessions a player is responsible for. To that end, we’re adding up true shooting attempts (accounting for field goal attempts and earned free throws), assists and turnovers per 100 possessions. For some players, there is a significant difference between their creation and involvement scores.
• Defense (Defensive Box Plus/Minus): The proliferation of the 3-and-D wing and switching schemes demands we look at how wings perform defensively. To do that, we’ll use their Defensive Box Plus/Minus (DBPM) score, which measures a prospect against an average baseline (0.0) per 100 possessions.

We have a sample of 126 prospects to work with, including all college wings taken in the 2012-16 drafts (2012 is as far back as some of our data sets go) and the 30 players in this class. Here’s a look at how all 126 players stack up.

Below, you’ll find thumbnails for the images of all 30 prospects in the 2017 class. You can click on the image to enlarge it. Each measure includes a percentile rank shown in parentheses for the prospect relative to the maximum value for a prospect in that criterion since 2012. After that, there is a breakdown of the four wing prospects projected to go in the top 10 of the 2017 draft — Jayson Tatum, Jonathan Isaac, Josh Jackson and Malik Monk.

These charts are not meant to be complete scouting reports — the creation metric, for example, only speaks to the volume of self creation, not to the efficiency of it — but they do provide a baseline profile and can tell us some interesting things about the prospect. For a slightly deeper dive into the measures, let’s look at the top four wing prospects in the draft class starting with Jayson Tatum.

Jayson Tatum, Duke

Of the four wings most likely to come off the board in the top 10, Duke’s Jayson Tatum is the most well-rounded in terms of his profile here. The 19-year old can create a bit of offense, provides spacing and shows up defensively in the box score.

Tatum’s reputation largely centers around his ability to create his own offense. He has great footwork and a fluid isolation game, plus he makes the tough shots that stick out on film. Tatum’s 6.8 unassisted made field goals per 100 possessions are tied for the 14th highest mark in this sample (alongside teammate Luke Kennard and former Michigan man Caris LeVert). The big question is whether or not Tatum can efficiently create those shot attempts.

The Duke product rarely handled the ball in pick-and-roll this season (22 possessions) and he scored an average of 0.682 points per possession (PPP) (36th percentile) on those plays, per Synergy Sports. However, when Tatum was allowed to operate in the mid-post, he looked like a prospect who could eventually become a go-to scorer in fourth quarters when defenses tighten up.

The 6-foot-8 wing scored 0.896 PPP (70th percentile) in isolations and even more impressively averaged 1.303 PPP (99th percentile) on 33 post up possessions, per Synergy Sports. Tatum also knocked down 13 of his 26 deep mid-range shots, a valuable skill for when teams take away the rim and run you off the 3-point line like the San Antonio Spurs did to the Houston Rockets. The key for Tatum will be not falling in love with that mid-range game as a scoring option and committing to being a more willing passer.

Tatum’s 3-point shot is also a work in progress. He made just 34.2 percent of his attempts this season, but his high free throw percentage (84.9) and mid-range results suggest it’s just a matter of time before he develops into a competent 3-point shooter.

Figuring out how he’ll impact the game defensively involves plenty more film study. As a college player, he did a nice job of creating steals and blocking shots from the weak side, but he has some issues related to general awareness that can’t really be explored via the numbers.

Tatum’s high-end outcome would position him as a team’s primary initiator. However, it’s unclear that he has the passing acumen to fill that role. At 3.7 assists per game, he finished in the top half of the prospects evaluated here, but producing at the same level as Jamal Murray, Marcus Denmon and Malachi Richardson is hardly the way to inspire confidence in your passing game.

Tatum’s middling outcome — an isolation scorer who isn’t a high level passer — is a tough archetype to build an efficient offense around. The 19-year old may ultimately find his best role to be a secondary initiator who can become a go-to option late in games.

Jonathan Isaac, Florida State

As much as any other prospect, Jonathan Isaac’s profile seems to accurately reflect the prevailing opinion regarding his NBA potential. There are significant questions about the role that the Florida State product will play on the offensive end, a concern that’s exemplified by his lack of production in the creation stats. Isaac’s creation score (6.3) ranks 112th out of the 126 players in the database.

The difficult thing to sort out is how much of that lack of creation is an absence of ability and how much of it is the product of his college environment. Both Xavier Rathan-Mayes and Dwayne Bacon dominated the ball for the Seminoles, which limited the number of chances Isaac had to show his potential skill. At best, though, it is far from assured that the 19-year old will be able to initiate much offense at the next level.

There should also likely be more questions surrounding Isaac’s ability to space the floor. While his usage at Florida State plays a factor here, Isaac wasn’t a prolific 3-point shooter this season. He attempted 5.8 3s per 100 possessions as a freshman and connected on them at just a 34.8 percent clip. His free throw shooting (78.0 percent) offers some optimism that his accuracy will improve, but this is another area of Isaac’s offensive game with some uncertainty. That said, if Isaac is able to play as a power forward or even as a small ball center, the value of his 3-point shooting — even at 34 or 35 percent — will increase.

Isaac’s size and defensive acumen ultimately makes that a possibility. At 6-foot-11 with a 7-foot-1 wingspan, he has the length to perform as a rim protector and rebounder. Add in his lateral mobility and ability to contain penetration and you have the makings of an incredibly versatile defender. He still needs to add weight to his frame, but Isaac has already shown his productivity on defense. His +6.2 DBPM score is tops among freshmen in this sample and sixth overall.

Isaac is just the fourth freshman since 2010 to average 6.0 defensive rebounds, 1.5 blocks and 1.2 steals per game. The others are Dedric Lawson, one of the most underrated players in college basketball each of the last two seasons, and two of the top defensive centers in the NBA, Anthony Davis and Nerlens Noel.

In short, the Florida State product is likely going to be a top 10 pick on the back of his potential to be an elite role-player in the NBA. Along with OG Anunoby, Isaac is one of the two most versatile defenders in the draft class, which gives him a terrific baseline to build from. Anything that he’s able to add offensively, whether it be creation or floor spacing, will be icing on the cake and the required strength of those offensive skills will vary significantly with the position that he’s asked to play.

Josh Jackson, Kansas

Josh Jackson’s profile is another one that seems to follow the scouting report. The Kansas freshman can create offense, defends at a high level and has some trouble with his jump shot. Jackson is one of two freshman in this sample of 126 players to post a creation score above 12.0. The other is last year’s No. 1 pick Ben Simmons. Both players also posted a DBPM of +5.0 or better. Like Simmons, Jackson seems to have a unique combination of two-way skills.

However, if you wanted to make the argument against the 20-year old’s potential as a primary initiator, it wouldn’t be too difficult. Jackson really struggled to be efficient in creation situations in the halfcourt this season. He scored 0.542 PPP (16th percentile) as the pick-and-roll ball-handler, 0.609 PPP (23rd percentile) in isolation and 0.833 (59th percentile on post ups, per Synergy Sports.

The flip side of the coin is that Jackson was able to show of his upside as a facilitator on a Kansas roster that featured a plethora of floor spacers. He produced 1.316 PPP (94th percentile) on passes out of pick-and-rolls and 1.300 PPP (85th percentile) when passing out of isolation, per Synergy Sports. Additionally, his 5.4 assists per 100 possessions is the third best mark for a freshman in the sample.

Jackson’s best role in the halfcourt may not be as a primary option, but as a more of a secondary one who can break down a moving defense. Using him as a screener for a good shooter and putting him in 4-on-3 situations could work wonderfully. Jackson seems to shine in situations where his team has a man advantage. One of his best skills — leading the break after grabbing a defensive rebound — combines his creation ability with his nose for the ball. As the transition ball-handler, he scored 1.14 PPP (84th percentile) this season, per Synergy Sports.

Jackson’s floor spacing ability is a well-known uncertainty despite the fact that he shot 37.8 percent from deep this season. His awkward mechanics and poor free throw shooting (56.6 percent) don’t bode well for that number being sustainable. Perhaps there’s something to the theory that Jackson is more comfortable shooting in rhythm, but don’t bet on him being an above average 3-point shooter.

There are very few young prospects in the database who combine Jackson’s level of creation and defense, which makes it difficult to peg what his outcome will be. On an outlier growth curve, he could turn into a primary creator from the wing position with improved 3-point shooting and halfcourt efficiency. His middling outcome, though, will likely put him a secondary role, attacking moving defenses, defending multiple positions and shooting a slightly below average number from deep.

Malik Monk, Kentucky

Malik Monk’s top level profile is about what you’d expect. The Kentucky freshman was heavily involved in the Wildcats offense, resulting in him scoring 33.3 points per 100 possessions in 2016-17. Monk is also a terrific floor spacer, attempting 11.6 3-pointers per 100 possessions while knocking down 39.7 percent of his attempts. He entered college with a reputation as a streaky shooter — likely spurred on by his 5-of-20 3-point shooting in showcases in high school — but seemed to answer those criticisms this season.

Monk’s profile gets a bit more interesting when we dig into his creation statistics. On the whole, he was slightly below average when it came to creating scoring chances. His 5.1 unassisted made field goals per 100 possessions are far from elite, suggesting that the Jamal Crawford comparisons are almost certainly out of place. As a scorer in creation situations like isolation (0.789 PPP, 52nd percentile) and as a pick-and-roll ball-handler (0.778 PPP, 57th percentile), Monk was pretty average, per Synergy Sports.

However, the 19-year old was a better facilitator than you’d expect. Monk averaged 3.8 assists per 100 possessions and showed some promise as a pick-and-roll passer. Although it was only over 29 possessions, he produced 1.310 PPP (94th percentile) via his passes out of pick-and-roll actions this season. If Monk is given an opportunity to facilitate more consistently, perhaps as part of a second unit, his offensive value could increase.

Defensively, Monk is going to struggle to make an impact just as he did in college. At 6-foot-4 and 200 pounds with a 6-foot-3.5 wingspan, he lacks the size needed to comfortably defend non-guard positions. Monk was far from a disaster on defense based on the statistics, but he also didn’t do anything that stuck out either.

Next: Lonzo Ball's rudimentary handle and shake limits his upside

The Kentucky freshman has nearly identical physical measurements to another Los Angeles Clippers player, J.J. Redick. His shooting profile in terms of his ability to spot up and come off screens is also similar. If Monk solidifies his skill as a team defender and maintains his shooting percentages, he could reasonably expect to be a more athletic, better passing version of Redick. A higher end outcome for the Wildcat would see him unlock more of his creation potential both as a facilitator and a scorer.