^Zvonimir #14, listed at 7’2 across from his brother, Tomislav #13, listed at 7’0..

Ivisic’s skills are self-evident in the limited film, with maybe the most prominent one being his handful of quick triggered, no hesitation hoists from deep. The shot is quick, compact and without much use of lower body input. It’s an easy ball, and can be used as an effective option in pick-and-pop situations. One basic issue with the shooting is the volume, although he seemingly could not wait to get his shots up when he saw the floor for the first time. Even when compiling 3-point numbers from what I could find the last couple years, the grand total was still less than a hundred attempts, and same goes for free throw numbers. The eye-test for me says Ivisic is a shooter, but there will just need to be a bigger shooting sample to look at before fully checking that box in pen. But it is not the only skill Ivisic flashes.

Ivisic really captured some sort of magic in his debut, even summoning a wild behind-the-back pass while on-the-move. There are these occasional small glimpses into Ivisic’s vision as a passer, which manifest in highlight connections like that previously mentioned behind-the-back one, or with short-roll dishes to the rim or even more routine ones like in advance passes up the court. But there are also too many instances of poor, nonchalant passing execution and dumbfounding turnovers. Again, like with the shooting, there just isn’t enough film to confirm or deny his true proficiency as a passer, but the duality of questionable decision-making and functional passing upside is noted here. If Ivisic can hone and replicate those flashes as a short-roll and interior passer, it could begin to solidify his case as a pretty complete play-finisher out of the roll.

The skillset doesn’t stop there though, as Ivisic makes good use of footwork in several facets of his offensive game. As a screener, Ivisic is spry to screen continuously throughout a possession, flowing into actions with good pace and quickly diving out of screens. The screens themselves have a layer of physicality, with Ivisic showing that he can take a chunk out of the POA defender, although needs to clean up some of the illegal moving screens. In more conventional rolls to the rim, Ivisic is capable of finishing lobs, with signs of high-level coordination on adjustments for catches, although his vertical is not overwhelming. Ivisic also has nice feel and recognition for when both POA defenders are up on the ball-handler, slipping behind and finding the open space to settle into for the dump-off against the double team. Ivisic recognizes pretty immediately when he is open, and has his hands up as a target right away. And in those short-roll scenarios, Ivisic is generally under control and looking to advance upon the rim with intent to score, where his footwork shows up again as a useful tool. Ivisic does a nice job of utilizing pivots to find better finishing windows and even position himself for more powerful two-handed flushes at the rim. 

While his footwork and handle on short-area moves towards the rim are pretty effective, it is of note though that outside of some brief open-court handling from Ivisic in FIBA u20 that Ivisic’s ball-handling is not too functional. He had instances of issues keeping his dribble secure in tight spaces. That will need to be cleaned up at the very least for DHO actions, but it does not lend itself to Ivisic as any sort of threat to attack from the perimeter outside of on-the-catch with momentum. 

And while he is skilled getting into finishes, Ivisic plays in a more finesse-leaning tilt. As a big, there should be an element of punishing physicality to your game. A post game was non-existent for Ivisic at Kentucky, which is not a huge deal as he translates to the pros since he executes his role as a roller, but it may also indicate a lack of ability to overpower college defenders, as he did have instances of struggling to post up smaller defenders in FIBA u20. It may be that Ivisic naturally leans towards being a more finesse offensive player with occasional forceful dunks when he’s maneuvered into position. 

If Ivisic refines and applies all his strengths in a bigger role next year at Arkansas, then he may become one of the most versatile screener threats in the class on the pop, roll and short-roll.

For context, at Kentucky Ivisic often played alongside two of the most skilled guards in the 2024 Draft class. Arkansas will have an experienced grad-transfer guard in Johnell Davis, along with fellow Wildcat transfer DJ Wagner, and more freshmen guard talent, but they will not be the passers Rob Dillingham and Reed Sheppard were. Still, Ivisic’s dual threats out of screening actions should help his guards help him. And if Ivisic’s spacing ability is true, it gives Calipari some lineup flexibility with their other frontcourt players.

It is not unreasonable to be buying into Ivisic as an offensive player. But the big question for bigs is on the defensive end. Which defensive frontcourt roles can you fill? 

Ivisic has decent mobility for a 7 footer, but his initial stance on the perimeter is often not nearly low enough or engaged enough, routinely getting blown by right at the line of scrimmage. While Ivisic has some recoverability to make a play at the rim and make up for giving up the angle, NBA guards will have plenty of room in the intermediate area to use that angle to manipulate and handicap that recoverability, especially if the blow-by is occurring immediately way out on the perimeter. Ivisic is not the beefiest plodding center, and he can move fairly well, so the expectation should be placed higher for him guarding on the perimeter. Not asking Ivisic to lock anyone up, but just looking for him to be more competitive in this area and contain the ball better. Though Ivisic has shown great length, quick hands and quick reaction time to block jumpers on the perimeter. 

The lack of perimeter defense at this point for Ivisic hurts the case that he could possibly play some 4. Not only would the on-ball stuff be concerning, the supplementary weakside defense seems largely absent. Ivisic played the 4 for Croatia’s u20 team in 2023, while his brother played the 5, and he was very quiet as a weakside presence, with little-to-no activity coming from that position. The instincts for it just weren’t there. I won’t say this is damning for any case that Ivisic could play the 4 defensively, but in addition to the perimeter woes, it’s close. 

While Ivisic does have height and length that can be disruptive defensively at the rim and the timing of some blocks with his outstretched arms is nice, many instances came without rotating from very far. As a POA drop big, Ivisic’s positioning can be moderate to fair, sometimes losing a half step on a downhill driver just like his perimeter defense, ending up in that vulnerable position behind the ball-handler, but again has the recoverability that he unfortunately seems to rely a little too much on. More film of Ivisic as a defender is needed here to see how he has progressed in his positioning.

Lastly, the rebounding lacked physicality and finding box-outs was not routine, and at times it looked like Ivisic struggled a bit to cleanly end possessions with a rebound. Even in some post defense, Ivisic had a tough time battling for ground and post real estate. As a prospect who has nearly eliminated themselves from the proposition of playing the 4 defensively, Ivisic has a lot to prove as someone who can fulfill a center’s defensive duties in the NBA.

The argument for Ivisic revolves around his offensive versatility as a rolling and spacing threat, which is where he can separate himself from other prospects on that end, but each individual ability is far from concrete at this point. Ivisic will need to truly evolve each skill from a flash to a legitimate weapon. More importantly, at the end of the day a player who is confined to the center position defensively really needs to be a strong defensive anchor. With more minutes, Ivisic should have a chance to showcase growth on the defensive end. I will be looking for a more consistent awareness of the rim, and more physicality overall. 

The post Prospect Focus: Zvonimir Ivisic appeared first on Swish Theory.

The next prospect in this series is Ryan Kalkbrenner. This report on him (posted at the end of this piece) was from 2020, coming out of high school ahead of the 2020-21 college basketball season. The prep reports had a little different format than the draft reports, but largely the same. So this is the snapshot of my evaluation on Kalkbrenner going into college. I’ve also noticed in reviewing my notes and observations from the past that the more filled out a section is, the more likely that those skills are imposable and a true part of the player’s game. I’ll touch on the report, but since Kalkbrenner is one of the top returning center prospects, I’ll also fold this piece into a look forward at his 2024 Draft prospect case. 

Starting at the top of the report working down, the first note is including a draft age. Not that Kalkbrenner was really on any draft board radars as an incoming freshman, but it gives a better gauge of where he was at relative to the more draft-ready prospects and talents. Kalkbrenner would have been 19.4 if he entered the Draft after his first season, which was unlikely considering he came off the bench to begin his college career. 

But before that, while Kalkbrenner come into college with center height, some of his other dimensions and elements of his athleticism were lackluster for the center position. As a towering skinnier kid in high school, Kalkbrenner had plenty of work (mostly weight) to put into his frame. Listed at the time in high school at 210 lbs, Kalkbrenner needed to beef up by about 40 lbs to get to average NBA center weight. The home court of measurements is your own team’s website, and Creighton has Kalkbrenner very generously listed at 270 lbs. I do think Kalkbrenner has done good work to strengthen his frame and put on weight over the years, but 270 lbs must be his top-end weight, if even. 

Part of the reason I doubt he carries 270 lbs is because Kalkbrenner has run the floor quite well. Looking back at the high school report, that floor-running was present, but it seemed laborious. Kalkbrenner’s stride and speed over the years at Creighton has genuinely improved, where now he seems to comfortably run the court. But the willingness was always there. It would have been fair to project from this report that with several years in a college weight and conditioning program, Kalkbrenner would be able to adequately fulfill the baseline athletic requirements of the center duties, running the full court and screening constantly.

Although center size and full-court mobility could be projected out, Kalkbrenner had a reportedly underwhelming vertical. Not that Kalkbrenner would have any trouble dunking at his height, but it begins to put a cap on all the possible dunking opportunities that are available to him in a game, and thus the projection can begin to eliminate starting NBA center outcomes. NBA centers need to clean up around the rim, and what better way than by dunking. And what easier way to dunk than by just jumping over and/or around guys. Kalkbrenner still has the height and length for some dunking opportunities, but would likely miss out on others relative to competition via lack of vertical. Kalkbrenner has 263 dunks in his college career, so he could still find dunks in the NBA.

Last note on the athleticism, Kalkbrenner had some change-of-direction challenges, not uncommon for a tall player to have. Not sure how much emphasis was placed on his hip mobility while at Creighton. I’m sure there was marginal improvement, but it was not starting from a great place. 

Moving onto the shot evaluation, Kalkbrenner’s “trebuchet” mechanics and “concerning” level of touch landed him a shot projection of “needs time,” which was a cowardly cop-out projection from myself. Of course it needed time, everyone’s shot needs time to get better! 

Taking a look at it again in 2024, I think there would need to have been some tweaks to the set point to remove that trebuchet component, trying to tighten up the process. Also noteworthy, his 62.1% career FT% on 309 attempts is an acceptable percentage for a young big man. Of course in need of time and improvement as well. Here’s how Kalkbrenner’s form looked in his most recent season, and his FT numbers from college:

The set point at the top of his release does not get cranked above and/or behind his head anymore. At the free throw line, Kalkbrenner brings that shooting pocket up to his chin, which is fine in the context of an unguarded free throw but not super translatable to shooting in live game play. Kudos to Kalkbrenner for putting in the time and putting himself over the top of that typical 70% FT% threshold.

The context portion of the prep report included two teams: Kalkbrenner’s high school team in Missouri and his AAU team. In both contexts, he was tasked primarily with protecting the rim. The level of competition in high school did not impress, but some of the plays Kalkbrenner made at the rim defensively on Mac Irvin Fire against elite AAU athletes was outstanding, and the kind of eye-popping element you want to see as a scout. 

Small note, but the ankle tweaks back in high school have followed Kalkbrenner a little bit in college.

Moving on to the skills section of the report, Kalkbrenner had an operable handle, but nothing to suggest anything outside of what a typical center would need to do. The more pertinent ball skill to look at is the finishing, where Kalkbrenner’s lack of touch around the rim was vicariously frustrating. For a supposed 7-footer, it was disconcerting to see. It would also matter less if Kalkbrenner was constantly flushing down dunks, but it has been established that he is not that type of athlete. So as dunks dry up due to lacking a premier vertical, Kalkbrenner’s opportunities would become a little further out from the rim. Not incredibly far out, but far enough that some level of touch would be required. Kalkbrenner did get above 70% 2p% as an upperclassmen in high school, so it was not like his touch was horrendous. But that was against high school competition, and projecting out to the NBA means a center must maintain an extremely high level of efficiency in the paint. 

As a decision-maker, Kalkbrenner seemed to play within himself and his role, making solid decisions and not hurting the team, which is very projectable for his position. Playing the right way and consistently making the right play right away, no matter the role, is a pretty good sign that a player is at least on the curve in terms of applied basketball knowledge.

The selling point for Kalkbrenner as a prospect, even coming out of high school, had to be his rim protection skills. The technique he displayed defending around the rim was simple and effective, as he would just position himself optimally between the driver and the rim, and then remain vertical while being as big as possible. And he encountered a slew of drivers on his Mac Irvin Fire AAU team, where he not only held his own but was quite the obstruction at the rim, fending off highly athletic and highly ambitious finishers. It was truly an elite skill heading into college, and a key reason at the time to keep tabs on Kalkbrenner’s development in other areas. 

Rim protection was Kalkbrenner’s calling card, and the next best defensive skill he had was in drop, exhibiting great feel in those 1-on-2 situations, not losing contact with the roller while working to deter the ball-handler. His footwork was not the quickest, and his vertical challenging lobs in those positions was not the best, but the positioning was very adept, and it signaled understanding of defending the PnR that was certainly ahead of the curve for an incoming freshman. 

Other defensive areas that were sound included using angles to stay in front of drivers, post defense and boxing out. The more vulnerable areas were not uncommon for a tall player: closeout speed getting out to the perimeter and control in those situations. 

From this report, Kalkbrenner’s main selling point as a prospect was the rim protection, which continued to be a strength of his in college. The technique has only been refined, and the experience has only grown. Does it meet the threshold for NBA center rim protection duty requirements? I think it would be passable, but it is contingent on being paired with paint efficiency on the other end of the floor, per fundamental conventional center responsibilities. 

Below is Kalkbrenner’s career Barttorvik stat profile. 

The block percentages are nothing to sneeze at, but they are a little below the 10% BLK% often seen in the profiles of high-level rim protecting prospects. While I do think Kalkbrenner’s technique, willingness and audacity is on par with other good rim protecting prospects, it may be a degree or two below the elite rim protector prospects. And that may be another way Kalkbrenner’s lack of premier vertical ability limits the amount of impact he can make at times. Still, I think it is fair to say that Kalkbrenner checks the rim protection box for a center, which is the primary responsibility.

Rounding out the defensive evaluation, Kalkbrenner, like many centers, can be exposed a bit on the perimeter. But if the defense is staying true to form and keeping good defensive infrastructure, Kalkbrenner can be a competent cog in the machine on that end, although again, the lack of vertical may pose some trouble rebounding at times to finish out possessions. I imagine Kalkbrenner should be passable on the boards, but the margins do add up.

On the offensive end, Kalkbrenner has served his role well at Creighton. Primarily a play-finisher, Kalkbrenner plays within his role, screening and rolling, and taking the shots that he’s supposed to take, which is evident in his eFG% year after year. It’s incredible how efficient you can be when you cut out bad shots. Not that Kalkbrenner came in with much fat to trim – he already knew which shots were in his “bag.” It is not a deep bag, but as long as he keeps putting himself in the right positions, he will be able to accrue productivity playing off of NBA PnR partners. His screening, and then pace meandering into the paint is proper and timely, and he should pair well with any NBA guard. The screening can be a bit more physically punishing, but it is functional. 

Shooting near 75% at the rim per Synergy last season, Kalkbrenner seems to meet the threshold as a play-finisher, but the margins of touch and vertical as well as the athleticism of NBA competition will put a squeeze on Kalkbrenner’s level of efficiency in the league.

While the FT% has held steady over 70% every year since his sophomore year, and the stretch ability has been dabbled in at this point, with Creighton allowing Kalkbrenner to rip off 54 3pt attempts last season, the shot projection does not seem super promising. First off, using the lack of great paint touch as an indicator for touch in other areas of the floor, I would not be inclined to believe a threatening above-the-break 3 is likely. Plus, his lack of paint touch unfortunately does correlate with his poor 3pt%, although from a small sample size so far. One stat to point to for the optimists: Kalkbrenner has shot over 50% on far 2’s per Bart the last two seasons, going 29/57 and 44/81 from that range his junior and senior year respectively. Still, any stretch ability is down the line, if at all, and should not be weighed much in the overall projection.

As for play-making, it has been minimal at Creighton. He was not tasked with it, but flowed in Creighton’s offense, setting dozens of on- and off-ball screens every night. Capable of kicking out vs double teams and dribbling into handoffs, Kalkbrenner checks the box of passable passing for the center position, but it would be nice to know how much short-roll passing chops he has, if any.

Ultimately, Kalkbrenner has the skillset to fill the conventional center role, but may barely pass vertical, mobility and play-finishing thresholds. How much do those limitations come back to bite him? The bold rim protection could earn him minutes early on, and he should be able to exist satisfactorily in an offensive ecosystem. Kalkbrenner checks the boxes of what’s required from a center, but to what degree for each box? Is it to a high enough degree? An NBA degree? Where is he adding surplus value? I will want to see Kalkbrenner show up and show out at the rim defensively this next year, shutting things down and proving that skill is at an elite degree. On the offensive side of the ball, I want to see Kalkbrenner showcase more agile footwork around the rim; if the touch around the rim is indeed a bit clunky, use footwork to find easier finishes. 

As for the initial retrospective look at Kalkbrenner, the identification of rim protection as the main skill and calling was correct, as it still is his most promising NBA skill. I was right and wrong about the shot projection, as the free throw shooting has come around, but I was wrong for using such a vague description since I did not even specify outside of “needs time.” No duh.. Time and effort has also taken care of the weight concern, even if Kalkbrenner isn’t really at 270 lbs. 

Kalkbrenner has developed for four years since the writing of that report, and he has no doubt refined his shape, defense and form shooting. His strength at the rim defensively has remained constant, and his offensive flow is competent. That prospect package meets the bare minimum requirements, without a whole lot of skill on top to add value. If Kalkbrenner can showcase hitting shots in those intermediate pockets out of PnR, that would be a new element to his game as a play-finisher, and something I think is reasonable to add. 

Short-roll passing is another reasonable thing to see, as Creighton usually has great spacing and shooters that attract defenders out, which leaves room for that short-roll option. Not many college contexts have that short-roll possibility, but maybe Kalkbrenner could develop some of it at Creighton. 

Kalkbrenner should be on radars by now as a rim protector, with eyes looking forward to seeing him expand his abilities and options finishing plays out of the roll.

The post Prospect Retrospective: Ryan Kalkbrenner appeared first on Swish Theory.

Broome is one of the top returning draft prospects coming into the 2024-25 college season. But there is a reason Broome is back at Auburn for a fifth year of college basketball, despite a strong statistical profile and a productive showing at the NBA G League Elite camp. What does Broome have to do to solidify himself as a 1st round prospect? What improvements should we be looking for? Let’s dive into his prospect case.

Meausuring at 6’9” without shoes and around 250 lbs at the 2023 G League Elite Camp, Broome has moderate NBA center size. With a seven-foot wingspan and a standing reach of 9 feet, Broome would be at a size disadvantage against your average-sized NBA center, although not drastically. Broome has physical strength that shows itself at times, but I would like to see him impose that strength more frequently next year. Most likely matched up with bench centers in the NBA, Broome should be able to hold up, but a more convincing display of strength would be encouraging. Broome cannot improve upon his size, but he can improve on his strength and physicality, which will become imperative when battling with behemoths in the league on any given night. 

As mentioned earlier, Broome’s statistical profile is overwhelmingly positive, with one glaring weakness: a worrisome career FT%. Almost everything else about his stat profile makes it feel like nitpicking to ask for much more in this upcoming season. The higher you climb, the harder it is to find oxygen, and Broome will find it challenging to build on such an efficient season. 

Broome’s shooting efficiency was superb this past season, with career-best EFG% and TS% in a year where he introduced a higher 3-point shooting volume, over doubling the 3-point attempts from the previous year. While encouraging, it is difficult to have too much faith in the shot due to a 61.5% career FT% on 532 career FT attempts. No matter what Broome shoots from the free throw line this year, even if it is a leap of an improvement, there should not be too much trust placed in that number, siding instead with the weighty historical evidence of rather poor free throw shooting. Still, stretching out to the 3-point line is a step in the right direction, and making that stretch element a more concrete part of his game would mean a lot in establishing real estate as a potential DHO hub above the break, where he is a capable playmaker. 

Over the course of Broome’s career, his assist percentage has increased and his turnover percentage has decreased, both to highly efficient degrees, refining a skillset in which Broome is able to operate as a useful offensive hub at times for Auburn. There isn’t much more room for statistical improvement in this area, so even maintaining that efficiency would strengthen his case. But on film, Broome’s passing out of DHO situations can and should get even sharper. I would not mind seeing a small jump in turnovers, granted it comes with tape of more nuanced, skillful passing; better and sharper timing on passes, better execution at times, more inventive passing angles. Broome has already proven he can do basic playmaking out of DHO actions, and it would be informative to know how far he can take his passing skill. Auburn will be a highly competitive environment, so it may be unlikely Broome is given enough leash to try out some more intricate passing. But on the other hand, Auburn may have games where they are whooping an opponent, and may give Broome opportunities to expand his game in this way. Not expecting any leaps here though, but a “stretch goal” to look for. 

As a play-finisher, Broome is efficient and shows soft touch on hook shots and push shots in the intermediate area. The lefty is very strong hand dominant, heavily preferring to get to that lefty hook out of self-created post touches. Broome’s post game has some counters and some pivots to it, and the left-handed tendency. His paint touch on those floater-type shots is nice, but the release itself is a bit slow and low, focusing on softly adding that touch rather than getting the shot out quickly. Some NBA centers may be tall, long and quick enough to snuff that out if Broome is too transparent about taking it at his leisurely pace. But if paired with a guard who can methodically encroach upon the paint, draw multiple defenders’ attention and lay it off to Broome in that deep paint area with space, he could put that touch to good use. A capable dunker and lob catcher with his decent vertical, Broome gets the job done around the rim, but nothing rim-rocking. As mentioned earlier, Broome could stand to impose a little more physicality in his finishing. 

The play-finishing also stems from constant and fluid screening, getting out of screens and DHO actions quickly and into rolls to the rim as a huge cog in the Auburn offensive machine. A veteran at this point, Broome clearly knows how to execute offense and be a useful screener, although the more bone-crushing screens the better. 

The offensive synopsis for Broome is that he seems to comfortably pass the basic thresholds in screening, finishing and playmaking (relative to position) but avenues for improvement in those areas seem steep, along with having reasonable hesitation about a shot that is admittedly headed in the right direction. 

On the other end, Broome is a solid college defender, executing POA schemes and generally being in the right spot. While his mobility is fluid for his size, it remains moderate mobility. Some closeouts and PnP coverage out to the perimeter can be a bit slow, but that is a difficult position for any center to be in. 

The size concern may crop up again with POA defense too, where Broome does put himself in good position, and yet the defense is not deterring much. On more aggressive coverages out on the perimeter, Broome can contain a more apprehensive ball-handler, but it does not take a whole lot of work from a quick guard to get around him or just make the next pass. Broome’s stance can be a bit high at times, and the lateral slides can get a bit hoppy, which more experienced guards can take advantage of or just speed by. In drop, Broome again situates himself well in those 1-on-2 scenarios, but guards don’t seem to have too much stress finishing over him, and bigs don’t seem too bothered finishing around him. Broome does increase the level of difficulty of some of these shots, but hoping to see more disruption, which manifests itself in recovering from blocks. I just wish the main source of disruption wasn’t stemming from getting beat initially. 

Lastly, I would again like to see Broome be more physical in the paint and especially against other bigs. I want to see Broome fighting for every inch of paint real estate, pushing post players out another foot or two. I want to see Broome hold up better against strong post players, who gain ground on him too easily. Broome needs to play more like someone who is legitimately 250 lbs. 

Yes, Broome does have successful instances too, but point being is that I wish his defensive presence was more impactful. I found many of his steals to be less about him creating the turnover and more about the offensive players’ mistakes. He would also make some risky pokes at the ball out on the perimeter, showcasing quick hands but not sure how available those steals will be at the next level. Broome has pretty good timing and hand placement on some blocks, and he requires both because neither his size nor vertical is overwhelming. He is also quite disciplined about keeping his arms straight up when contesting from vulnerable positions, but it’s typically coupled with not jumping either, which renders the safe contest largely unimpactful.

None of this is not meant to disparage Broome, who is a good if not great college basketball player, a highly productive and efficient player for a top-20 team. But considering his size and strength relative to NBA competition and his current skillset, Broome projects solely as bench big. There is a huge degree of difference between a starter and a bench big, and while a smaller difference between second and third string centers, there is still a meaningful distinction. The level of bench big Broome becomes will be determined by the shot (as is the swing skill of most players), because without it, Broome could find it tough to find separation from other bigs on the roster. All the margins add up, which is why I have been harping on Broome in this piece to stretch himself this season in search of development. Broome will be nearly 23 on draft night. I am not sure how much improvement is feasible, and he may not necessarily need any to be drafted, but in terms of his place on a depth chart, it could change the course of his early NBA career. 

The post Prospect Focus: Johni Broome appeared first on Swish Theory.