It's A Number Game But Shit Don't Add Up Somehow

From the time I got on the bus yesterday morning until when he stopped texting me back seven hours later, Smallz and I exchanged mini-diatribes about the NBA Draft ranging from which player the Wolves should take with the fourth pick to the proper way to evaluate talent and construct a team to the other person's deficiencies at evaluating talent and those of their chosen method to constructing a team. Basically our arguments were this.

Smallz loves efficient players. Thus Kevin Love is his one shining beacon on our entire roster. As such Al Jefferson inspires much hatred in Smallz's gut. Not only does Jefferson play the same position as Love but inefficiently uses the ball in offensive situations Love would efficiently use them. His evidence is statistics and his team-building philosophy is to find other efficient players to pair with Love.

I, on the other hand, believe Jefferson is inefficient because he needs to be. Love is a good player and a compliment to Jefferson. But efficiency statistics don't tell the whole story. As the most offensively-skilled player on the Wolves, a less-than-efficient attempt from Jefferson is still better than passing the ball to a less talented teammate. Being the focus of the offense and the volume of his shots he can't cherry-pick only the best attempts. Basketball is scored as a quantitative game, not an efficiency game, and to remove Jefferson without a suitable replacement will only focus the defense on another lesser player.

(Further reading found HERE.)

This is especially important with the NBA draft coming up. Since the Wolves didn't get one of the surefire guys at the very top of the draft, their path forward is a lot less clear. Smallz wants to trade Jefferson to free playing time for Love and draft Kentucky's DeMarcus Cousins, a freakishly large center who may have character issues. I want to keep both Jefferson and Love while drafting Syracuse small forward Wesley Johnson, a lower risk lower reward player who plays a position of need. We could argue back and forth for hours (and did) about which one would be a better fit for Minnesota. I wanted to model the problem and get some results now.

How I Used Math To "Solve" the Problem

So let's assume three things. First that either Cousins or Johnson could boom or bust with equal likelihood. Let's just say Cousins wider range of possible outcomes averages out to Johnson's thinner range to make things easier. Second, let's assume the pick is an independent outcome. Let's say if Minnesota picked Cousins they wouldn't keep Jefferson and his minutes would go to DeMarcus. Third, the actual outcome will be one of many possible outcomes. When a weatherman says 55% chance of rain and it doesn't, he was right. It just fell in the 45% he didn't mention.

Here's the "game" I developed. Imagine every possible outcome for DeMarcus Cousins' and Wesley Johnson's careers is represented by a playing card. Since they are top draft picks they are more likely to succeed than fail so all face cards represent complete success (being a cornerstone), ten through six represent qualified success (being an NBA starter) and five through two mean they bust. I could look up the real success rate but let's keep it simple. Now draw two cards, one representing Cousins and the other representing Johnson. Reset the deck, reshuffle the cards and repeat the process 100 times.

(Or do like I did and use a random card generator like THIS ONE.)

What I found is Cousins is a cornerstone 37% of the time, a starter 38% of the time and a bust 25% of the time. Likewise Johnson is a cornerstone 38% of the time, a starter 33% of the time and a bust 29% of the time. In 48% of the cases Cousins is the better player while Johnson is the better player 45% of the time. (The remaining 7% is when they're even.) It's also worth noting Cousins is significantly better 27% of the time while Johnson is significantly better 26% of the time.

So what do the results tell us about who the Wolves should take? Nothing. This is a simplified model of an enormously complex system. But within the context of the system it says we should expect any result to be possible. In that way both experience and this simulation align. In the NBA Draft eventually you have to play the odds and hope for the best.

P.S. This is the raw data from my simulation. Cousins is on the left and Johnson on the right. Ignore the symbols. That's just me coding the data.

CJ

A4**
A3**
A9**
88-
610++

610++
Q8**
QK*
63*
32*

5J++
10Q+
9J+
87*
410++

56*
3Q++
34+
5A++
67+

109*
QJ*
4K++
82**
109*

63*
56+
7Q++
86*
J8**

3A++
910+
5K++
J9*
Q4**

103**
KJ*
JQ+
A2**
9Q+

25+
K5**
9Q+
4A++
63*

44-
6K++
6Q++
9K++
K3**

KJ*
8A++
5J++
8Q++
A5**

25++
7Q++
KA+
K8**
A3**

J3**
22-
J3**
37++
24+

76*
9J+
A4**
3K++
QJ*

KA+
88-
53*
A8**
82**

36+
J8*
8Q++
J7**
Q9*

6J++
AA-
6A++
A5**
310++

92**
QQ-
JK+
56+
8Q++

8J+
Q9*
Q6**
Q5**
810+

J2**
33-
104**
A7**
QA+