Read Hegotgame's link and you will see nbadraft.net is the second best website/author in terms of guessing where players get drafted. The loser Chad Ford who I have heard some people on here mention as a reliable source is 8th in the rankings. That speaks for itself. The website was updated today for your insight and is updated usually twice a week.
I don't visit that site, thus not sure when updated.
Ehh all that shows is that the NBA draft is hard to predict and nbadraft.net was better than others 12 hours before the draft,
not 6 months before.
The "2nd best" in that system got 7 draft picks off by more than 5 spots. That's almost a quarter of the draft and who knows how off they were by for those 7. Secondly, they got 7 spot on which is good but not great. At least 2 picks last year were gimme's or should have been in Irving and Williams. So aside from that they got 5 out of 28 correct. The grading system would be more impressive if they did a few things:
- Gave negative points for being off by more than 5 spots.
- Grade the second round mock as well
- Weight it based on if it's a lottery pick or not or top ten, etc. I think being more accurate as the draft goes on would be a huge advantage. (You could do something like use a +10 for being perfect and -10 for being off by 20+ spots then use a multiplier where every pick is worth it's position).
This way if you got Irving correct you get 10 points but if you got Jimmy Butler correct you got 300 points and if you got Majok correct, 580 points. If you had Irving second you get 9 points. If you had Jimmy Butler as 38, you get 16 points. You have Majok not drafted, minus 580 points. Sure a lot of the experts would be in the negatives, but that would probably be more accurate. Reason being is that the front of the draft should be much easier to get correct while the back end is more of a crapshoot. Let's see how well these draft "experts" do then.
This may not be perfect either but I was just spitballing.
Edit: I might consider not counting the picks 51-60 if they are wrong and give "experts" the benefit of only getting a zero for them if the "expert" didn't have them drafted. I would have to give this more than 10 minutes worth of thought.