"And with the number one pick, the Wizards select...John Wall."

These words should have given Wizards fans optimism. The number one pick is supposed to change your franchise. Of course, at the time, there were dissenters about John Wall being the "obvious" number one pick. And sadly, these dissenters seem to have been right. Yes, Wall has made one All-Star game, but it's fair to say that he's not a franchise-changing player. Of course, he's just signed a new max contract. It's possible that, during the life of this contract, Wall will become the star that the Wizards need. But we're not holding our breath on it.

Did the Wizards make a mistake picking John Wall? Probably. Did they make a mistake offering him such a big contract? Probably. But it turns out that they made a much bigger "mistake". Their mistake was getting the number one pick in 2010, instead of some other year.

You see, not all drafts are created equal. Arturo has a draft model that examines things like college stats, height, and age. While Arturo is quick to note that it is far from perfect, it has a pretty decent "hit" rate (a little over 40%) and lines up suspiciously close with the Spurs' choices. Arturo attempts to estimate a player's Wins Produced per 48 minutes (WP48) for their rookie year. A WP48 of 0.100 is average, and 0.200 is a star. How did Arturo's top five picks look in 2010?

• Damion James - 0.094 WP48
• Evan Turner - 0.092 WP48
• Derrick Favors - 0.092 WP48
• Ed Davis - 0.086 WP48
• Xavier Henry - 0.086 WP48

As the top-rated player in the 2010 draft, Damion James (who the Spurs picked up after the Nets and Hawks bounced him around after a few years) wasn't even projected to be an average player. And John Wall was rated a lowly 0.031 WP48! As Dave noted in his recent post, for most of his rookie contract, he has not been that hot.

Again, rookies are hard to project. I would never even attempt to think an exact WP48 would be close to correct. But it is a good guide for determining which players to look at. Let's compare the projections from 2010 to projections from the top picks in previous drafts:

2009:

• DeJuan Blair - 0.218 WP48
• Blake Griffin - 0.186 WP48
• Ty Lawson - 0.119 WP48
• James Harden - 0.091 WP48
• Stephen Curry - 0.080 WP48

2008

• Michael Beasley - 0.211 WP48
• Kevin Love - 0.166 WP48
• George Hill - 0.121 WP48
• Marrese Speights - 0.111 WP48
• Ryan Anderson - 0.102 WP48

2007

• Kevin Durant - 0.165 WP48
• Greg Oden - 0.125 WP48
• Mike Conley - 0.106 WP48
• Al Horford - 0.103 WP48
• Rodney Stuckey - 0.079 WP48

Notice how much deeper each of these drafts were compared to the 2010 draft. Even if we get to put on our 20-20 hindsight, only Paul George has really seemed to play like a legitimate star, and a lot of that is thanks to a few fairly impressive jumps in performance. The Wizards faltered because, even if they had been more stats-oriented in their analysis, they wouldn't have been able to find a star in the 2010 draft. 

This just goes to show that the odds that you'll find a star with the number one pick are far from 100%. Even in talented drafts, there are still some landmines. Beasley never matured. Oden had his injury issues. Griffin and Curry have both suffered injuries. And even if you are smart with your pick, there's the risk that they won't develop as planned. But the Wizards had it even worse; they had the number one pick in a draft that didn't have a lot of star power. In short, the Wizards weren't going to fix their team with the draft. The problem is that both the team and their fans are acting like Wall is the reason for their turnaround.

This line of thinking may get the Wizards back in the draft. Wizards' fans can only hope that the pool of players will be stronger the next time the Wizards make a lottery appearance.