Another trip through The Statistical Doppelgänger Machine, and another case of ambivalence. On one hand, the comps feel about right. On another hand, they’re not that thrilling. On still another hand, I like a couple (one is someone I’ve suggested Carrington model himself after), and I’m generally okay with another.
Like most Wizards fans, I like Carrington. In two seasons, he hasn’t missed a game. He’s competitive and seems to have some toughness. And last season, he shot 40.8% on threes.
And yet, his score in my PPA metric (where average is 100 and higher is better) was 59 in his rookie season and 61 last season. Comparing the two seasons, he shot better on threes, worse on twos, and much worse on free throws. His rebounding was a relative strength in year one but dropped last season. He produced more assists per possession but more turnovers too.
His overall offensive efficiency was about -10.5 points per 100 possessions below average as a rookie and -10.8 last season.
While seemingly competitive and tough, his defense has been quite poor. That could be because he’s subpar athletically by NBA standards.
My prescription for Carrington was for him to get stronger and mold himself into the kind of physical defender no one wants to face. He’s young enough entering year three, that the “get a lot stronger” option is still available to him.
Although the team was tanking and many players were missing games, Carrington’s playing time fell from 30 minutes per game as a rookie to 27.7 last season. Not a huge difference, but he’s likely to see further reductions with the additions of Trae Young, Tre Johnson, and AJ Dybantsa — not that Dybantsa will snack on guard minutes himself, but that he’ll push Bilal Coulibaly and possibly Kyshawn George into backcourt roles.
In other words, the Wizards will finally have some competition for minutes, and that’s a very good thing for the franchise.
For those new to The Statistical Doppelgänger Machine series, this is an annual dog days ritual here at Bullets Forever. I run Wizards players through The Machine, and the fancy-schmancy algorithm goes through every player season since 1977-78 and tells me which ones are the closest matches.
The Machine weighs 14 categories, including age and minutes played. I don’t include factors like position or height, but the comps tend to come from the same position group.
Here are Carrington’s closest comps based on his play last season:
- Theo Maledon | 2020-21 | Oklahoma City Thunder | Age: 19 — This was rookie year Maledon, and it was bad. He got marginally better (at least on a per possession basis) in subsequent years, though he played less and less. Carrington is already better in most areas, but not by a wide enough margin (except for three-point shooting) to make me think this comp is utterly ridiculous. Maledon was out of the NBA after his age 22 season.
- Kevin Huerter | 2018-19 | Atlanta Hawks | Age: 20 — This was the comp I mentioned as being “generally okay” with earlier in the article. Huerter grew into an average-to-a-bit-above-average player before he started getting hurt all the time. The similar strength is shooting, though it’s worth mention that Huerter’s three-point shooting fell off as his career advanced — defenses adjusted, his mobility declined with the injuries, or maybe his base shooting ability declined (his free throw shooting has also gotten worse).
- Marcus Smart | 2017-18 | Boston Celtics | Age: 23 — This is the guy I think should be Carrington’s model. Get stronger, study and work hard, and become a ferocious and physical defender. Maybe dial back some of the offensive decision-making — Smart never was high usage, but he exhibited some iffy shot selection nonetheless. The problem? This was year four for Smart, and it was the worst of his career. He hit his stride the following year and posted four straight better than average seasons overall. And won Defensive Player of the Year. That DPOY…let’s just say I was not among the group who thought he should have gotten that one. Still, a psycho defender who’s a competent playmaker and good three-point shooter? That’s a guy with real value off the bench. One more caveat: I’m not convinced Carrington has the athletic tools Smart did, even if he puts in the weight room work.
- Andrew Nembhard | 2022-23 | Indiana Pacers | Age: 23 — Up until last season, I’d have described Nembhard as a tough defender who could shoot a bit and found some success playing next an elite playmaker and offensive engine. Then he had the best season of his career with Tyrese Haliburton injured. He posted career highs in usage, efficiency, assists, scoring, three-point shooting, free throw shooting. I mean, he took on a heavier offensive burden and lowered his turnover rate. Bad team, but the efficiency suggests it wasn’t just a case of a guy screwing around while the team’s star was out of action. Once again, I think there are significant athletic tools differences between Nembhard and Carrington, which I think will show up on the defensive end.
- Killian Hayes | 2022-23 | Detroit Pistons | Age: 21 — Hayes was the 7th overall pick in the 2020 draft, which did not work out well for Hayes or the Pistons. They get something of a pass because it was the COVID year, which made evaluations more challenging. This was year three for Hayes, and it was just barely above replacement level. The following season, he was rocking a 73 PPA (useful reserve range) but appeared in just 42 games in 2023-24. He’s still bouncing around the NBA periphery, appearing in 23 games for the Sacramento Kings last season (age 24).
The honorable mentions are closer to the Maledon or Hayes mold than the other three — Yogi Ferrell, AJ Johnson, Cam Reddish, Nik Stauskas. A little further down the list are some comps that would be a dream scenario for the Wizards — young seasons from Mike Conley, Tony Parker, Jrue Holiday, and Deron Williams. I mean, also Emmanuel Mudiay and Boobie Gibson, but still.
As I mentioned when writing about Coulibaly’s comps, the main takeaway is that young players with similar production at a similar age can see their careers go in wildly different directions. Odds are that Carrington turns out something closer to those “good” names in the top five comps — decent players with some real strengths and the ability to contribute to strong teams. I wouldn’t anticipate a career like Conley’s or Parker’s, but…weirder things have happened.
Next up: Will Riley.
