Collins to test NBA, update: he has signed an agent, per Jeff Goodman

Psydeac said:
Does a team have any incentive to be completely honest with the player for when they might get picked?
Click to expand...

This is where the NBA combine becomes more important. Individually teams may not be totally honest, but the multiple team people present and offering evaluations should tend to produce something of a decent approximation to where, perhaps plus minus a few spots, the player's value is. John should have a pretty good feel where he falls - in the lottery, out of the lottery, end of first round, etc.
 
birdman said:
What would be the disincentive?
Click to expand...

If there's a player like Collins who is a borderline lotto/top 20ish pick, teams could say they're more interested than they really are to convince him to come out and potentially steal him with their (later) pick.
 
TownieDeac said:
If there's a player like Collins who is a borderline lotto/top 20ish pick, teams could say they're more interested than they really are to convince him to come out and potentially steal him with their (later) pick.
Click to expand...

But if they have a post top 20 pick, what would it matter?
 
jaybone said:
But if they have a post top 20 pick, what would it matter?
Click to expand...

If he fell out of that top 20. I'm saying it seems like it behooves teams to lie towards saying they like players they really don't rather than the other way around as a generality, not that any scenario like the one I described above is likely.
 
TownieDeac said:
If there's a player like Collins who is a borderline lotto/top 20ish pick, teams could say they're more interested than they really are to convince him to come out and potentially steal him with their (later) pick.
Click to expand...

That is where evaluation by teams in the bottom of the lottery become important, particularly if they tell him he's not lottery, but should be right after the lottery, or not. They would have little incentive to sandbag him. He won't drop to their second round pick.

The incentive for teams being honest is maintaining reputation with agents in particular, and college coaches as well. If a team and/or evaluator gets a reputation for being wrong by a lot, it will not help them with future negotiations and evaluations.

With the number of current and recently retired Wake NBA players, Danny and company will be able to guide Collins as to who the straight shooters are and who the bull shooters are.
 
PhDeac said:
Some mock drafts are based on conversations with team personnel.
Click to expand...

Why would team personnel tell some douchebag with a website that they rate a player highly, so that someone ahead of them can take him? They have every incentive to be dishonest and sandbag. They have absolutely no reason to tell the truth.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
It isn't game theory, it is common sense.
Click to expand...

Ahh yes, the old common sense principles of not telling your competitors what you know or think so that they won't use it against you, in some sort of attempt gain advantage over you or take your resources before you have a chance. In this commonsense case there is an optimal point at which you make your move or reveal your information and all participants have linked decisions. If team 1 really wants a player and doesn't want them to forgo the draft by going back to school, they should tell him, but if they tell him the info might get out and some other team might draft the player ahead of them and then try to entice team 1 into a trade. Such a dilemma! What information do they reveal, when do they reveal it and who do they reveal it to?....wait a minute, that sort of sounds like a game theory scenario.
 
birdman said:
Ahh yes, the old common sense principles of not telling your competitors what you know or think so that they won't use it against you, in some sort of attempt gain advantage over you or take your resources before you have a chance. In this commonsense case there is an optimal point at which you make your move or reveal your information and all participants have linked decisions. If team 1 really wants a player and doesn't want them to forgo the draft by going back to school, they should tell him, but if they tell him the info might get out and some other team might draft the player ahead of them and then try to entice team 1 into a trade. Such a dilemma! What information do they reveal, when do they reveal it and who do they reveal it to?....wait a minute, that sort of sounds like a game theory scenario.
Click to expand...

The reality is everyone knows which players are likely to go in the Top 20. There could be a few that go a little up or down. There really isn't much they don't know other than what trades may impact picks. There are always a couple of surprises, but agents and coaches get good intel.
 
There is an incentive for teams lower in the draft to get as much talent into the draft as possible.

If I have the 21st pick and I know or suspect that at least one team above me has JC in their top 20, then even if JC isn't in my top 30 I have an incentive to get JC to declare in hopes that he gets picked in the top 20 thus bumping someone in my Top 20 down to 21.

Or let's say I have the 18th pick and have JC rated 18th. I may know that no other team has JC in their top 30, but I still have a strong incentive to tell him that he is a guaranteed Top 20 player. This way he enters the draft and I am guaranteed to get one of the top #18 players on my board. But if #17 on my board drops to 18 then JC likely ends up outside the first round.

The combination of those two scenarios could lead to a player getting inflated feedeback on his draft position
 
A flaw in all of that is other teams also evaluate players. So it would be hard to game other teams. Kids that a relatively uneducated could fall for the 'you are great we know it others don't ' line.
 
Deac83 said:
A flaw in all of that is other teams also evaluate players. So it would be hard to game other teams. Kids that a relatively uneducated could fall for the 'you are great we know it others don't ' line.
Click to expand...

Another thing that you must remember is that these are 18-20 year old kids with egos that have been stroked all their lives. They are going to believe the great things they hear about themselves and discount or ignore the less-than-great things they hear - at least as a generalization.
 
I'm digging the lack of buzz around Collins right now

A quick flame out in both tourneys may help us out after all
 
This is where John Collins needs to trust Manning. Danny has been in the NBA and seen a lot there. He can help Collins sort out honest evaluations from smoke being blown up his ass about how good he is. Collins also has a yardstick based on the games he played against some of the guys going in the draft. That is one advantage of playing in the ACC. Multiple games against other NBA prospects. They can trade info and pretty easily figure out that 15 guys aren't all going to be top 10 picks.

Even #Curry math can't make that work.
 
RChildress107 said:
There is an incentive for teams lower in the draft to get as much talent into the draft as possible.

If I have the 21st pick and I know or suspect that at least one team above me has JC in their top 20, then even if JC isn't in my top 30 I have an incentive to get JC to declare in hopes that he gets picked in the top 20 thus bumping someone in my Top 20 down to 21.

Or let's say I have the 18th pick and have JC rated 18th. I may know that no other team has JC in their top 30, but I still have a strong incentive to tell him that he is a guaranteed Top 20 player. This way he enters the draft and I am guaranteed to get one of the top #18 players on my board. But if #17 on my board drops to 18 then JC likely ends up outside the first round.

The combination of those two scenarios could lead to a player getting inflated feedeback on his draft position
Click to expand...

This makes sense. Thanks. And you teed it up in a why that makes me wonder why I didn't think of it that way, so appreciate the clear scenarios.
 
Good explanation, RC. "I'll take you at 18" doesn't mean "I won't take somebody else at 18."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top