Why the Hawks, Nets, and Wolves Missed Pahan Sen at 26—Data Says He Belongs at 19

The Draft Didn’t See Him—But the Data Did

I saw it happen: three teams passed on Pahan Sen at No. 26. Hawks. Nets. Wolves. All chasing the same flashy narrative—name recognition, highlight reels, loud buzz. But none looked at the real numbers.

My models don’t care about hype. They care about floor control: how often he disrupts transitions under pressure. How his defensive actions collapse into efficient rotations—not flashy steals, but silent ones.

The Real Pick Is 19—not 26

I ran the numbers again last night after the draft ended. Player efficiency ratings? Defensive impact? Transition pace? All point to one truth: if you strip away the noise—the name, the team lore—the data says he belongs at No. 19.

This isn’t magic. It’s math.

Why Data Speaks Louder Than Hype

I grew up in a Polish-Catholic home where truth wasn’t whispered—it was calculated. My father taught me: ‘Don’t trust what they say; trust what it does.’

Pahan Sen doesn’t need a spotlight. He needs a heatmap. And an algorithm that sees what eyes miss.

The Warriors didn’t take him? Good. They’ll regret it when he breaks their defense in Game 3.