Ace Bailey Draft Analysis

NBA Projection: Starter

1. Draft Age

• 18.9 years (7th percentile amongst 1st round drafted players between 2004-2024)

2. Physical Tools

• Height without shoes: 6' 7.50''

• Wingspan: 7' 0.50''

• NBA Size: Wing

3. NCAA Team Role:

• NCAA Starter at Wing

• bpm: 3.7 (10th percentile amongst 1st round drafted players between 2004-2024)

• Strengths

  • Off ball scorer (2nd highest usg%, pts/40)

  • defensive: decent blk%

  • above average mid range %

• Flaws

  • low bpm

  • poor playmaker (low ast%, negative ast/tov ratio)

  • poor scoring efficiency (low FT% , 2P%, rim%, ftr)

4. Nearest Neighbours within 2 years of Draft Age

• Neighbour means 2025 Draft Class ranks:

  • KNN Dist: 14 of 30

  • Neighbour NBA Adv Rank Mean: 21.25

    • NBA_Start% Rank: 24 of 30

    • BPM Rank: 17 of 30

    • WS/YEAR Rank: 23 of 30

    • VORP/YEAR Rank: 21 of 30

  • Overall:

    • averagely distant neighbours

    • below average production in NBA

1. Star: Ingram

2. Starters (NBA_Start% >= 50%): Hardaway

3. Rotation (VORP>=0): Beasley, Whitmore, Robinson, Lamb

4. Fringe (VORP<0): Vaughan, Robinson-Earl, Jones, Howard

5. Analysis

Bailey was highly regarded to be one of the top picks in the draft as an ideal wing scorer. However his inefficiency as a scorer and poor playmaking are concerning for his NBA potential to be a lead scorer or playmaker. His scoring strength is in midrange, but the midrange in the NBA is the space of stars and not off-ball players.

The NBA stats are the blank stats in Bailey’s column and the filled stats are NCAA.

The good news for Bailey’s playmaking projected improvement is that all of the neighbours improved from the NCAA to the NBA. The improvement in ast/tov for the majority of the players was to decrease the tov% and not increase the ast%. The only neighbours that increased ast% in the NBA are Ingram (massive 9.3% increase) and Lamb (1.8% increase). Note that Ingram and Lamb are the only two neighbours that were onball players (Lamb off the bench as a 6th man) in the NBA (unassisted two % > 50%). The rest are primarily offball players. Bailey’s ast/tov will likely improve in the NBA (even Whitmore’s did), but to be an onball star he needs to increase the ast% significantly while lowering his tov%.

1. Bailey is similar to Ingram as a NCAA prospect and this is the path to becoming a star as a leading scorer. Bailey’s playmaking is already worse than Ingram’s in the NCAA and Ingram improved significantly in the NBA. Bailey’s playmaking would need to improve a magnitude greater than Ingram’s in order to be an onball star wing primarily in the mid range.

2. If Bailey’s playmaking doesn’t improve, he has a path to become a NBA starter as a offball Wing-sized Hardaway or the bench version in Beasley with better size and defensive potential. Bailey strengths are mid range shooting %, as he has a low rim rate and inconsistent from 3P%. In the NBA, Bailey’s shot profile as an offball player needs to change like Hardaway and Beasley did to shoot more 3s and shoot it more efficiently than in the NCAA.

3. A larger wing-sized with better defensive ability and better playmaking Whitmore is a possibility. Whitmore hasn’t definitively cracked the Rockets rotation, but has been a positive VORP player early in his career. Whitmore improved his abysmal ast/tov in the NCAA to almost neutral in the NBA so this bodes well for Bailey as his NCAA playmaking is better than Whitmore’s.

4. Lamb is a bench SG that significantly increased his ast/tov in the NBA. He has the 2nd highest NBA VORP/YEAR in this neighbour list after Ingram. A wing sized version of Lamb would likely be a starter in the NBA due to better defensive potential.

5. The fringe neighbours lack the wing size of Bailey. Just based on Bailey’s physical tools and defensive stat output (stl% and blk%), it is unlikely that he mirrors any of these players.

Bailey has a solid path to be a starter as a Wing-sized offball player if he changes his shot output from midrange to 3. There is a path to become a star like Ingram, but this requires a significant playmaking improvement.

Predicted NBA Outcome: Wing Starter

Appendix:

1. Star: Ingram

   1. Ingram

      1. similar

         1. didn’t measure at combine, similar wing size to Bailey

         2. age

         3. orb% and drb%

         4. ft%

         5. defensive stats (blk%, stl%)

         6. rim rate and rim shooting %

      2. disadvantages

         1. 2P%

         2. dunksmade/40

         3. mid range shooting %

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. 3P% and 3pa/100

         3. ftr

         4. playmaking: ast/tov, ast%

         5. shot creation: unassisted rim%, unassisted dunk%

      4. Ingram NBA changes

         1. FT% improved greatly

         2. ast/tov and ast% improved greatly

         3. mid range rate and shooting % increased greatly

         4. defensive stats decreased

2. Starters (NBA_Start% >= 50%): Hardaway

   1. Hardaway

      1. similar

         1. FT% and 3P%

         2. shot profile rates: rim_rate/mid_rate/dunk_rate/three_rate

         3. shot creation: Unassisted rim %/Unassisted mid %

         4. rim shooting %

      2. disadvantages:

         1. 1.4 years older

         2. SG size instead of Wing

         3. athleticism: orb%, drb%, dunkmade/40

         4. defensive: blk% and stl%

         5. mid range shooting %

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. playmaking: ast/tov and ast%

      4. Hardaway NBA changes

         1. shooting specialist: increased FT% and 3 rate

         2. less mid range shots and more 3s

         3. improved mid range shooting

3. Rotation (VORP>=0): Beasley, Whitmore, Robinson, Lamb

   1. Beasley

      1. similar

         1. closest statistical match to Bailey

         2. dunksmade/40

      2. disadvantages

         1. SG sized instead of wing sized

         2. 0.7 years older

         3. defensive stats (blk%, stl%)

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. ast/tov (albeit still negative)

         3. 3P% and FT%

         4. ftr

         5. mid range shooting %

      4. Beasley NBA changes

         1. 3 rate increased

   2. Whitmore

      1. similar

         1. age

         2. defensive stats: higher stl%, but lower blk%

         3. shooting %: FT%, 3P%

         4. ftr

      2. disadvantages

         1. SG size instead of wing size

         2. playmaking: lower ast/tov and ast%

         3. orb%

         4. mid range %

      3. advantages

         1. 3pa/100

         2. shot creation at rim: dunksmade/40, unassisted rim% and unassisted dunk%

      4. Whitmore NBA changes

         1. lower rim rate and higher mid and 3 rate

         2. playmaking improved albeit still poor with 0.89 ast/tov

   3. Robinson III

      1. similar

         1. ast%

      2. disadvantages

         1. older by 1.5 years

         2. SG size

         3. 3P%

         4. defensive stats: stl%, blk%

         5. mid range shooting %

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. FT%

         3. ast/tov

   4. Lamb

      1. similar

         1. dunksmade/40

      2. disadvantages

         1. older by 1.1 years

         2. SG size

         3. orb%

      3. advantages

         1. FT%

         2. ast/tov albeit still under 1 at 0.85

         3. rim finishing % and mid range finishing %

      4. NBA stat changes

         1. ast/tov improved significantly from 0.85 => 2

4. Fringe (VORP<0): Vaughan, Robinson-Earl, Jones, Howard

   1. Vaughan

      1. similar

         1. age

      2. disadvantages

         1. low bpm

         2. SG size

         3. defensive stats

   2. Robinson-Earl

      1. disadvantages

         1. 1.7 years older

         2. SG size

         3. defensive stats

      2. advantages

         1. positive ast/tov ratio at 1.38

   3. Jones

      1. disadvantages

         1. lower blk% despite bigger size

      2. advantages

         1. big Wing or C size

   4. Howard

      1. disadvantages

         1. didn’t measure at combine, likely SG size and smaller than Bailey

         2. very low orb% and drb%

      2. advantages

         1. positive ast/tov ratio at 1.59