Debating the merits of Tyus Jones

Top 100 | Mock Draft 3.0 | Stat Big Board 1.0

ESPN Insider's Chad Ford and Kevin Pelton return to provide the kind of discussions that are happening in front offices around the NBA -- where scouts and statistical experts are breaking down NBA draft prospects using their "eyes, ears and numbers."

Question: Kevin had Duke PG Tyus Jones ranked No. 2 in his latest Statistical Big Board while Chad had him ranked No. 24 on the Big Board. That's a 22-pick disparity. What gives?

Chad Ford: The scouts and GMs I've spoken with just aren't that high on him. He's having a great season. He might be the best pure point guard in college basketball right now. But of all the GMs and scouts I surveyed, none of them have Jones ranked in the lottery, let alone No. 2. Some weren't sold he was a first-rounder.

I spoke with a few of them over the weekend after Kevin's Big Board came out to see if their own internal metrics were saying similar things. Some were and some weren't. But in the front offices where scouting trumps analytics, Jones just isn't topping the charts -- at least not yet.

Every time I watch him play, I'm impressed and I respect Kevin and his statistical Big Board, but there's a pretty big gap between his perceived draft value from scouts and what Kevin's numbers are saying. It reminds me a bit of UCLA's Jordan Adams last year.

Kevin Pelton: It's not unusual for a player who rates as well by my numbers as Jones to be considered a late first- or even second-round pick. Typically, it's been more common with big men. Adams (seventh in projected WARP last season) and Jones are a bit of the exception in that regard. But in 2012, Jared Sullinger (taken 22nd) was rated second; in 2011, Kenneth Faried topped the WARP projections and went 22nd; and 2009 leader DeJuan Blair went in the second round. Those players were all undersized big men, and Jones' physical limitations are different.

Question: Can you provide more detail on why Jones is or isn't ranked so highly on your boards?

Ford: Scouts and GMs are typically looking for three things when searching for top-shelf NBA prospects: (1) elite size or length for position; (2) elite athletic ability for position; and (3) at least one elite skill that translates in the NBA.

Jones' lack of elite size, athleticism and an NBA body are clearly hurting him. He has the game of an NBA player, but not necessarily the physical attributes of one.

Jones is undersized for his position compared to other NBA point guards and doesn't possess an NBA body. He measures a little under 6-foot-1 in socks and has just a 6-3 wingspan. He also lacks great strength for a point guard and is just an average athlete. While he's quick and shows the ability to change speeds, he's not an explosive athlete.

What he does have is an elite skill set. He sees the floor as well as any point guard in the draft. He rarely turns the ball over and is a leader on the court. He's especially impressive knowing when he needs to take over and score and when it's time to be a distributor.

The question, in the minds of so many scouts, is whether the elite point guard skill set he has overcomes those other two weaknesses.

Are the numbers seeing things about Jones that scouts aren't seeing, Kevin? I know, for example, he's shot the ball much better than the scouting report said he would this season. Or, do they just value elite point guard skills highly?

Pelton: Though the translation to the NBA takes a lot of air out of Jones' 40.3 percent 3-point shooting, the combination of that and his accurate free throw shooting (83.7 percent) makes shooting a strength for Jones. Another point in his favor is that he's quietly been very good at getting to the free throw line. Per field goal attempt, his free throw rate ranks fifth in the ACC -- ahead of teammate Jahlil Okafor and more athletic point guards such as Notre Dame's Jerian Grant and North Carolina State's Anthony Barber.

Question: Who are the comps for Jones? And who are the other top point guards in the draft?

Ford: I've heard a lot of scouts compare him to the Suns' Tyler Ennis who, if I remember correctly, also ranked as a top-10 player on Kevin's board last year. Ennis didn't have great size for his position either, nor was he an elite athlete, but he showed similar poise as a freshman point guard. He ended up sliding a bit in the draft when working out against more athletic point guards and really hasn't had a chance to show his worth for Phoenix this season.

The one thing about the Ennis comp is that Ennis was a little bigger and a little more athletic than Jones. However, I'd say Jones is a better playmaker than Ennis and, up to this point, has shot it better.

As for other point guards there aren't a lot of elite prospects in this draft. I have Emmanuel Mudiay and D'Angelo Russell ranked higher (both in the top five) and I think both are better prospects. After that, it's a pretty big scrum among Grant, Delon Wright and Terry Rozier in the same range as Jones.

Pelton: The Ennis-Jones comparison definitely makes sense, though for the reasons you mention, the gap between his statistical projections and the scouting consensus was never quite as large for Ennis. And lo and behold, SCHOENE says Ennis is the only player of a similarity score of better than 95 to Jones at the same age.

Besides Ennis, Jones is a fairly unique prospect. The other two players with similarity scores better than 90 at the same age are UCLA point guards: Jrue Holiday and Jordan Farmar. Darren Collison also scores as highly similar, but that was as a senior. It's interesting that Jones gets compared to such good athletes. I think his free throw rate might be a factor. Typically, smaller point guards who get to the free throw line so often are jets. Some examples: Mike Conley, Ty Lawson, Chris Paul, Jeff Teague, Isaiah Thomas and Kemba Walker.

Question: Which players have recently emerged as draft sleepers?

Ford: Kris Dunn, PG, So., Providence

Dunn is having a very good sophomore season for Providence and scouts are starting to mention him as a potential first-round pick. A few things really stand out. He's racking up a crazy 5.1 steal percentage this season, good for sixth in the NCAA. And he has the highest assist rate in college basketball. He's also proved to be accurate finishing around the rim and on 2-point jumpers. He has good size for his position (6-3 with a 6-8 wingspan), is a terrific athlete and a terror on the pick-and-roll.

I'm sure his crazy high turnover ratio (23.1 percent of his possessions end in turnovers), pedestrian 3-point shooting (33.9 percent, 20 made 3-pointers on the season) and poor free throw shooting (66.2 percent) are bringing him down. But when you watch him play, there seems like so much potential. Could the lack of elite teammates be to blame for some of this? Dunn does have a very, very high 28.0 percent usage rate.

Pelton: I wouldn't necessarily say those are the issues. Based just on this season, Dunn would be not far from my top 10. His high steal rate and great assist rate are strong statistical markers, and other projections have Dunn as a top prospect. What's really holding Dunn back in my system is that more recent seasons get less weight than earlier ones, because late bloomers tend to underachieve. And Dunn didn't look anything like an NBA prospect in 2012-13, his freshman season (he took a medical redshirt last season after shoulder surgery limited him to four games), when he had a 12.4 PER. Because of that, Dunn actually has a negative WARP projection.

My sleeper is Rico Gathers, PF, Jr., Baylor

I used to have a theory that teams would do well just to draft the NCAA's leading rebounder each year. Such a strategy would have netted you Faried and Paul Millsap. The past couple of years, leaders O.D. Anosike (Siena) and Killian Larson (Grand Canyon) haven't been legit prospects. Gathers could change that. He was leading the NCAA at 12.4 rebounds per game before a relatively poor effort (six rebounds) in Tuesday's win over Texas Tech. Watching Gathers in that game, it's evident that he'll struggle to score against long shot-blockers, and it's tough to evaluate his defense in Scott Drew's zone. But if any skill translates to the NBA from college, it's rebounding, and I could see Gathers going in the second round to a team that utilizes analytics. Gathers isn't in your Top 100. Have you heard anything about him from scouts?

Ford: Gathers is fun to watch. He's built like an NFL lineman and you're right, he's just beasted on the boards this season. I don't think scouts see him making the leap to the NBA this year. For someone so strong and physical, he's shooting just 45 percent from the field and 52 percent at the rim despite taking more than 70 percent of his shots from there, according to Hoop-Math.com. He's shooting only 27 percent on 2-point jumpers. You might be right -- teams should draft him based just on his rebounding, but Millsap and Faried were much better offensive players than Gathers. As a late first-rounder, I think I'd lean more toward someone like Gonzaga's Domantas Sabonis. He doesn't have quite the rebounding rate of Gathers, but he's a freshman and has much more promise on the offensive end.

Pelton: Oh yeah, I'm not thinking about Gathers as a first-rounder. I'd compare him more to Jon Brockman than Faried and Millsap. I see him as a flier in the second round -- more likely in 2016 than this year.