2026 NBA Draft
Guide & Big Board

High on him

Cam Boozer is the best prospect in a loaded 2026 Class. He is a player that cannot be put into a box. There simply aren’t players with his intersection of power, versatility, feel, and production. This makes him the unanimous #1 pick on the Swish Theory Big Board.

Boozer is an absolute tank at 6’10” in shoes with a 7’1.5” wingspan. He’s 253 pounds and knows how to use his frame to create advantages. He’s a monstrous post scorer who punishes mismatches and forces his way through opposing bigs. As a driver, he has superb body control and can dislodge defenders with his overwhelming strength. And Boozer also creates plenty of second-chance opportunities with his aggressiveness on the offensive glass. 332 rim attempts is monstrous volume, especially for a guy with such a hefty creation load (57% of his makes at the rim were unassisted). Even if the bigs he’ll face in the league have more size, it’s hard to imagine an 18-year-old with his historic level of dominance not excelling against pros.

But Boozer isn’t purely a bruiser – he’s a versatile offensive weapon. He can drive and create his own shots at the rim. He can run inverted pick-and-rolls and get to his spots. He can operate as a short-roll and DHO hub. He can let it fly from deep. 39.1% from three on 6.5 attempts/100 and 78.9% from the foul line are insane shooting indicators for a guy whose reputation is being a bully baller.

Boozer posted a 25.6% Assist Rate this season, a number that undersells his ability to facilitate and direct traffic. His timing is exceptional, finding open cutters and shooters on the perimeter and making accurate reads on the move. Boozer’s understanding of angles and ability to find teammates with a versatile array of deliveries is incredible for any prospect, much less a 6’10” Freshman. He takes care of the ball and is a step ahead of where the chess pieces will slide on the court. This feel also extends to the defensive side of the ball, where he has strong positioning and pesky hands to force turnovers and deflections.

That isn’t to say Boozer doesn’t have his flaws. He isn’t a great vertical athlete, limiting his potential as a primary rim protector and lob threat on the roll. He’s a sturdy handler and creator, but certainly doesn’t have the off-the-dribble shooting chops of Darryn Peterson or AJ Dybantsa. But Boozer’s dominance at every level he’s played cannot be ignored. Even if his highlights aren’t as aesthetically pleasing as some of the others in the #1 pick conversation, Boozer’s grit is special. He’s the king of the little things who also happened to be the undisputed best player in the NCAA. That’s a combination that is tough to put a ceiling on.

High on him

An electrifying talent, Darryn Peterson is one of the best guard prospects in recent memory.

The defensive playmaking is excellent, the downhill potential is immense, the 3pt shooting prowess shined in college, and the individual shot creation middy pull-up priors speak for themselves. The head-to-head high school marquee matchups vs Dybantsa and Boozer were legendary.

Peterson has as much potential as anyone in the draft due to his high floor as a D&3 high-impact guard mixed with a high ceiling as a star scorer. Darryn’s off-the-dribble self-creation superpowers could ignite in any moment, despite mostly staying hidden due to unfortunate circumstances with health and conditioning at Kansas reportedly affecting his play. While Peterson creates advantages with ease, he often looks to score first and pass only if needed, which can limit his offense’s flow.

With a healthy return to form, Peterson is a potential self-creating 3pt sniper superstar with real defensive upside to match, delivering a likely floor as a two-way starter if he can get his body right, with potential as high as All-NBA & All-Defense on both ends, a clearly elite talent who can take over any possession any moment.

High on him

Caleb Wilson has the kind of prospect profile that is normally reserved for first overall picks, but had the misfortune of being in a draft with three more hyped players who can also lay claim to the top spot. Wilson finished his freshman year at UNC with per-40-minute averages of 25.1 points, 11.9 rebounds, and 3.4 assists (pace adjusted). Since 1990, only five draft picks have averaged more than 24, 10, and 3 per 40 minutes, and four of them were taken first: Cooper Flagg, Victor Wembanyama, Andrew Bogut, and Larry Johnson. The odd man out is Alperen Sengun, who is first in the 2021 draft class in value over replacement. On top of this simple “P/R/A” query that already puts Wilson in exclusive, elite territory, he carried a 62.6% true shooting percentage, a 2.7% steal rate, and a 4.3% block rate. Wilson’s 12.7 box plus-minus places him eighth among high major freshmen since 2008, and is notably better than both A.J. Dybantsa and Darryn Peterson. The only question with Wilson is how he fits in the pros as a skinny, 6’9” guy with a traditional power forward skill set, but he is too good not to give the benefit of the doubt, and it is not out of the question that he develops a decent perimeter game.

High on him

A.J. Dybantsa led the NCAA in points per game as a young freshman, and is a rare prospect with the potential to one day do the same in the NBA. Blessed with a massive frame (6’9”, 7’0” WS), elite athleticism, and an array of iso moves that would make Drew Hanlen blush, Dybantsa is one of the best scoring prospects to enter the league in some time. Although prone to tunnel vision, A.J. does have the creative passing ability (4.2 assists per 40 minutes) to make defenses pay for overplaying or double-teaming him. A big scoring forward straight out of the 90’s/00’s era- think Carmelo Anthony or Tracy McGrady- Dybantsa is more comfortable in the midrange than beyond the arc (4.7 3PA per 40, 33% 3PT%), however he is such a handful getting to the rim and drawing fouls (9.5 FTA per 40) that he was able to manage 60% true shooting despite relatively inefficient shot selection. Though maligned for his lack of defensive impact at the college level (1.6 stocks per 40), I find it hard to believe that a player with his size and athletic ability can not be a decent team defender, at least to the point where it does not detract from his offense a la Melo. Perhaps the best present-day comp for Dybantsa is 2026 Jaylen Brown sans Jayson Tatum, who averaged 28.7 points on his way to an all-star nod and second team All-NBA. While Brown falls short of superstar-level impact, this would still represent an above-average outcome for a top pick.

High on him

Kingston is a fun player to write about. The one outright disappointing number is his wingspan, only an inch longer than his 6’2.5’’ height. But he is still a potentially dominant athlete. Flemings’ vertical score of 91.3 was tops of likely first round guards (Mikel Brown second at 88.5) and his agility score of 91.5 was #1 for that group, too (Burries second of likely first-rounders, at 73). Not to mention, he has a case for the highest feel prospect in the draft. Who was also top ten in NCAA Box Plus-Minus as a freshman.

My case for Flemings is that he deserves genuine consideration once Cameron Boozer is off the board, even when placed against AJ Dybantsa, Darryn Peterson and Caleb Wilson. Flemings was the undeniable offensive leader for Houston’s #15 offense (per BartTorvik), making them the #5 team in the country as his defense was not overly damaging on the country’s #3 defense. Their offensive scheme was plodding, relying on pull-up twos and rarely running in transition. Flemings provided the talent, skill and feel to make the offense work. In his minutes, Houston ran the 11th best offense in the country; when he sat, 71st.

Kingston wins with speed and high-value passing, boosting their rim rate by 7 percentage points and 6 percentage point better rim finishing, and transition rate by 12% with 47% better efficiency. Houston is a totally different offense with him on the court. Comparing him with past Houston lead guards, Kingston did not have quite the volume as senior Jamal Shead, but also had a lower turnover rate while being far his junior. Shead just turned in an excellent passing season for the Toronto Raptors, with a 31% assist rate and 4.0 (!!!) assist-to-turnover ratio. I’d expect Flemings to at least replicate those numbers, an ultra-quick decision maker who naturally flows into advantageous positions.

Flemings was average or better efficiency as a scorer in his top four play types, in order: pick and roll ball handler (78th percentile), spot up scorer (84th), isolation (52nd), transition (82nd). His free throw percentage finished at 85% and three point percentage at 39%, both very good for a lead guard. The biggest red flag is his combination of low three point volume (5.6 threes per 100 possessions) and low free throw rate (28). However, both are at least somewhat a function of the Houston system, where he would initiate first, more of a bail-out scorer self-creating towards the end of the clock, with a very low team free throw rate (355th) and mediocre 3pt rate (153rd). With his strong outside shooting percentages, I think more volume will come easily. Additionally, he was still able to draw a free throw on drives 41% more often than turning it over. Kingston is both physical and smart, and I like to bet on those players.

What’s keeping me from being 100% bullish on Kingston is his 183 pound frame (lacking lower body strength) and 6’3.5’’ wingspan. Flemings will, much like on offense, be very speed-reliant on defense. That will lead him to having a decent floor for getting steals, and he even swatted 12 shots on the season, but he will also be easy to take advantage of when faced against bigger scorers.

Flemings stands out among the guards in this class by combining athleticism and feel with production and self-creation. His intensity and intelligence on the court bode well for him finding consistent ways to contribute in the pros. In the worst case scenario, he’s just an okay scorer, but I trust his passing will be safely elite. This is the type of offensive leader you bet on: one you can trust will find a positive way to start a possession with the capability of ending it.

High on him

Yaxel Lendeborg is one of the most polarizing prospects in this year’s draft, and on the surface, it’s not hard to see why. He’s in his sixth college season, and despite his very strong past production, only popped into mainstream conversation this season.

Still though, it’s a bit obvious that Yaxel is not your typical “old” college player — while the normal older college prospects tend to still have glaring holes in their game, it’s hard to identify one for Yaxel. He should be able to enter the NBA and make an impact almost immediately, with a strong and improved perimeter defense projection and an improving face-up game.

When I did some research on Yaxel last season, it was obvious that he maintained a versatile impact in areas outside of scoring, leading D1 players in fastbreak rebounds, which turned out to identify a number of high performing rookies. That version of Yaxel probably should have gone in the first round of last year’s draft, which doesn’t shed the age concerns entirely but gives me more optimism that he has met his developmental checkpoints at the right times.

Age is an issue — in fact, as one of the more modeling heavy evaluators, it plays a bigger role for me than anyone else. Despite that, Yaxel’s ranking in most draft models hasn’t really fallen very much, as opposed to other old prospects. It’s also worth noting that draft models are likely to underrate older players in the NIL era, with the training set skewing towards younger players before there was the incentive to stay in school. Given this bias, it’s likely there is a major edge for Yaxel in the draft prospect “market”.

High on him

Keaton Wagler remains the most polarizing prospect in this year’s draft, with a very jagged profile that has scared some very smart analysts away. Let’s start with the primary anti-Keaton Wagler argument: he doesn’t generate enough space on his drives, which leads to his poor two-point scoring profile.

Of course, that’s not poor logic: two-point scoring (Keaton was 57.5% at the rim, which is genuinely below average) is usually an okay proxy for advantage creation. Still, Keaton pairs the poor two-point scoring with a fairly high free throw rate, which suggests there may be more to his profile than immediately meets the eye. Film analysis shows that Keaton does have issues with acceleration, but he usually pairs that with very few wasted movements and a keen eye for gaps in the defense. The free throw rate suggests that defenders do have trouble dealing with his somewhat unconventional movement patterns, and it places him in the “very good” camp for rim pressure.

Another argument against Wagler is that his stats are somewhat inflated by playing in a team-friendly system, which has some credence, but that type of context-driven thinking should be extended to other stats as well, like his lack of dunks, blocks, and steals. Many have used those stats to make the case that the athletic disadvantages are too much for Keaton to overcome, but his team context has more than likely played a massive role in that as well. Illinois ranked 346th in EvanMiya’s true tempo. Avoiding fouls is a part of Illinois’ gameplan, so they force relatively few turnovers and break into transition less than other teams. In the other stats that would suggest athleticism and feel, like offensive rebounding, Wagler has shined, ranking in the 90th percentile amongst historical freshman guards. I think Wagler’s event-driven defensive production might be deflated, which could provide an even more robust floor for him during his career.

This is important to recognize Wagler’s greatest strength as well. He doesn’t have to turn into a creator to become a positive NBA player. With his strong three-point shooting, offensive rebounding, and steady passing, he can function as both a strong creator or secondary guard, which will allow him to contribute early in his rookie contract, if not in his first year.

High on him

An athletic 6’2” guard, Ebuka Okorie might be the most reliable advantage creator in the class due to his outlier quick first step burst, masterful ball-handling, lights-out shooting, impact indicators, and his next-level feel for the game.

He ranks historically well in turnover suppression among players with his level of impact and creation load. He ranks as one of the best players in many impact metrics such as age-adjusted BPM, 2026 NCAA BPM, and Cerebro C-RAM. He shows 3pt rates and rim rates that indicate a potential high-volume 3pt shooter and rim scorer. The two most efficient shots are where most of his shots come from, with the self-creation ability to create, take, and make shots in-between when it matters.

The list of Okorie’s proven capabilities is long. He:

Rarely turns the ball over

Dunks with ease

Forces steals & turnovers without fouling

Gets to any spot he wants, including the rim, at will

Has an efficient shot profile with a masterful ability to self-create

Creates efficient looks for teammates on kickouts

Runs offense as a pick-and-roll maestro, and

Scores efficiently in nearly every playtype.

Okorie looks to become a walking paint touch pick-and-roll maestro pull-up 3pt shooting sniper who can beat any defense thrown at him with pristine decision making and skillful execution.

A rare off-the-dribble threat with one-on-one superpowers, blending speed, skill, and decision-making, Ebuka presents a unique challenge for opposing defenses. His two-way talent and all-around skillset projects him to to be a good basketball player right away and a potential star offensive engine down the road.

High on him

The high case for Graves starts with his unprecedented mix of size, youth, and cognition. No one has even come close to Graves’ > 2.5 AST:TO, > 4.5 STL%, and > 4.5 BLK%. Yet that doesn’t scratch the surface of Graves’ unique profile. He’s at the precipice of perhaps the steepest development curve I’ve ever seen. Heck, just one year ago he had to redshirt. People use this as a knock against Graves and I honestly don’t get it. For one, he’s a normal age for a freshman prospect. Second, and more importantly, this implies a ludicrous development trajectory. Graves emerged from the redshirt cocoon as a uniquely gifted prospect.

In fact, Graves’ 16.2 BPM during conference play was second only to Cam Boozer. Graves also boasted a 3.3 AST:TO ratio (!!!), 5.4 TOV% (!!!), 5.4 STL%, 4.1 BLK%, and a 16.4 OREB% (!!!). Oh, and by the way, this was with INCREASED offensive responsibility (24.4 USG%). These numbers dwarf the already impressive season-long numbers, showing that Graves hit another gear later in the year.

Like I said: perhaps the steepest development curve I’ve witnessed in real time.

Now, the eye test brings about some questions. Graves doesn’t yet have the functional strength you’d like him to have as an interior finisher or defender. A wing skillset will be crucial for him to maximize his offensive impact at the next level. Defensively, I have real concerns despite the gaudy stock numbers. In particular, he left a lot to be desired as a help side rim protector. Opponents were confident driving the ball at a rotating Graves and exposing his lack of strength and vertical athleticism. Graves fouled a lot as a result. Graves’ athleticism can and will improve in the NBA. But, that doesn’t preclude evaluators from pointing out clear warts in Graves’ defensive skillset.

Graves’ detractors say the steal and block numbers don’t tell the whole story on defense. No argument here. However, stocks (along with assists and turnovers) are the ultimate statistical indicators of feel. As we’ve already outlined, Graves’ youth, cognition, and size combination is damn near unprecedented. We also saw Graves vault to rarely-before-seen college impact and cognition heights in the middle of the season. With this steep development trajectory, there’s no telling how much better Graves will get. For me, the stock numbers fuel this overwhelmingly positive development narrative as an indicator of outstanding feel; they’re not a Trojan Horse for a negative defensive player.

Projecting Graves’ role at the next level is a futile exercise because he’s a rapidly moving target. I’m betting on a surging player and trusting that trajectory to continue. Pure and simple. The all-time greats in basketball history started with a baseline of either outlier work ethic, outlier cognition, or both. I can’t pretend to know Graves’ work ethic behind the scenes. The rate of improvement bodes well on that front. What I know for sure: Graves is a case of truly outlier feel for the game and impact staring us in the face.

I get it. Graves 5th is a hot take, and it might blow up in my face. There’s some great players further down my board who’ll get drafted higher. None of them have some of the hall-of-fame upside indicators of Allen Graves.

High on him

Aday Mara’s anthropometric and statistical profile closely aligns with Roy Hibbert, one of the best pure rim protectors the league has ever seen, but who unfortunately also happened to be one of its worst 2-point scorers among bigs.

Conversely, Aday Mara has just come off one of the best finishing seasons in recent history, with 81 dunks and an 81% rim FG%. Furthermore, he did have a positive influence on his team’s rim frequency and accuracy this year (+4.5% frequency and +2.7% rim FG%), making me confident that he won’t run into the same issues as Hibbert, at the very least. This offensive floor of 2-point influence, combined with historically being one of the highest-volume passers among bigs ever (with plenty of high-value rim assists) at 7’4″ (!!!) in shoes, is intriguing on its own—but it becomes a top-10 package when acknowledging that he is one of the best rim-protection prospects ever.

In 800 possessions vs. T220 comps without Morez Johnson on the court, Michigan’s opponents had a mere 23.2 (!!!!!) rim frequency, 20.5 FTR, and a 49.4% rim FG%, as opposed to 33.6% frequency, 32.7 FTR, and 56.6% rim FG% in the off-sample populated by not one but two NBA-level bigs. The best teams in the league try to limit variance by focusing on the least variance-prone and highest-value area on the court: the rim. There is no other player in this class that provides the same rim influence as Aday Mara.

High on him

Wings are the hardest position group to evaluate in the draft, and the difficulty is intrinsic rather than incidental. When elite, a wing combines the best attributes of a guard and a big, creation, versatility, and the ability to defend multiple positions without the limitations of either. This is why teams circle over each other at draft time to grab one, and why year after year GMs get burned chasing the next Kawhi Leonard. The bust rate is high because it is genuinely a developmental position and prospects rarely arrive with the full skillset intact, which forces evaluators to project skills that may never materialise. What makes Dailyn Swain different is that most of what you’d normally be projecting is already there.

Swain is the rare wing who pairs an NBA-ready body – 6’8″ in shoes, 211lbs, 6’10” wingspan, 8’9″ standing reach – with an NBA-ready game. This physical baseline gives him a margin of error that allows him to take the floor in an NBA game right now. The headline of Swain’s game is his advantage creation: 7.2 half-court advantages per 100 possessions at an 81.1% success rate, sixth in this class across a 418-possession sample (per Ben Pfeifer). He got to the rim six times a game on an 80% unassisted shot diet, converted 60% from two and 48% from midrange, shot 81% from the line on a 52% free throw rate. He also posted a 1.49 ppp perimeter cut rate at the 96th percentile and a 1.56 ppp big cut and roll rate at the 99.7th, showing his ability to farm role player buckets. My favourite Swain tidbit though is his passing vision and feel. His PnR passing grades at the 93rd percentile and he averaged a 93rd percentile 3.3 rim assists per game, where his craft, aptitude for angles and on-ball creativity led to some noteworthy dimes. The result of this was his ORAPM sitting at the 93rd percentile.

So, why isn’t Swain getting more lottery buzz? Because there are some very valid, and real, concerns, chief among them being his poor three point shooting. Swain has never shot above 35% from three across three college seasons and has never exceeded five attempts per 100 possessions. This is not because he can’t make them, as his free throw and midrange numbers prove, but because he simply doesn’t want to take them. His release has a hitch and a slow delivery speed that will need structural correction if he’s going to stay on the floor at the next level. His turnover avoidance grades at the 8th percentile, and his DRAPM at the 41st percentile. His block rate this past season also dropped to 1.0, and his defensive motor showed lapses away from the ball, where he was susceptible to cuts and late closeouts that a player with Swain’s athletic base shouldn’t be doing.

What gives me hope with Swain, and why I’m so high on him, is that the majority, if not all, of these weaknesses can be explained by Swain being overtasked with usage and creation on a Texas team where he was clearly the best on-ball option. Swain’s methodical style of creation and pace aversion, likely born out his fear of early clock threes, meant Texas ranked in the 43rd percentile for pace, with defenses loading up to take away his immense driving threat. That context manufactured the turnovers, where he was forced into overdribbling into contested situations when the open shot isn’t being accepted. In his freshman and sophomore seasons, at sub-20% usage, Swain posted a 3.0 and 2.3 block rate respectively, and his defensive metrics were uniformly higher, showing that the motor is genuinely there and the lapses came with the offensive burden. In an NBA role where he’s a secondary initiator and off-ball mover rather than the primary option, the creation load drops, the pace question becomes irrelevant, and what remains is a player whose touch, feel, and finishing efficiency were never usage-dependent to begin with. The shooting and turnover issues are real, and will probably mean that Swain is unlikely to be given many on-ball reps early doors, if ever. However, the intersection of outlier self-creation and physical gifts, combined with healthy touch, passing and feel indicators are as good a guarantee as you get that these issues are fixable, and I find it hard to imagine a world in which he isn’t an impactful NBA player at worst, with a ceiling that few other players in the draft can rival.

High on him

A pillar of my scouting philosophy is that almost everyone has to scale down in the NBA. The league-wide barrier to entry for creators is as high as it’s ever been given recent defensive advancements. This is why ancillary value is so important: players need to be able to impact the game as non-creators. Given my affinity for ancillary production, it might seem unusual that I am writing the high-end report for Bennett Stirtz. In his first year of high-major play, the Iowa guard posted paltry rebounding and steal rates (1.0 OREB%, 8.7 OREB%, 2.3 STL%). Stirtz’s lackluster ancillary production when faced with higher-level comp is undoubtedly worrying for his long-term projection.

But the Stirtz upside case lies in the fact that he might not have to scale down in the league. Stirtz’s blend of 2P scoring, turnover-averse playmaking, and shooting excellence (on an insanely high minutes load) shares striking similarities with some of the best creators of the past decade. Junior Jalen Brunson and senior Bennett Stirtz are the only two players to ever meet the following playmaking/2pt scoring/shooting talent thresholds in a true-high conference: >20 AST%, <13 TOV%, >57 2P% on >200 2PA >8 3PA/100 and >78 FT%. Stirtz and James Harden are the only two players to ever post two distinct seasons of >80 min%, >6.5 OBPM, >53 2P%, and >22 AST%.

Aside from being a dominant 2pt scorer (thanks to his craft and touch), Stirtz is also a tremendously gifted space creator–his 3s have been primarily unassisted both years of his D1 play. This season, Stirtz frequently weaponized the threat of his pull-up 3 while being tasked with a ridiculously high creation load out of above-the-break PNRs, using his keen processing and sharp pocket passing to spoonfeed his Iowa teammates opportunities out of the short roll and slips. He has yet to play with a seven-footer in his college career; I believe his passing skill and pullup-3 gravity could lead to even more impressive team results when paired with a more physically imposing rollman and screener than the 6’9 Cam Manyawu. Stirtz drastically reshaped his shot diet to maintain offensive load and efficiency against higher-level competition this season (his 3pr went from 34.1 to 48.9). His stylistic shift served as proof of concept both for his shooting talent and adaptability as he weathers translations to higher levels of play.

I could sing Stirtz’s praises for a very long time: he’s a creator uniquely suited to offensive-loadbearing in the modern NBA. His mental and physical stamina have allowed him to thrive in physically grueling situations at the D1 level: the past two seasons, he’s played 39.3 and 37.8 minutes per game while handling overwhelmingly half-court initiation and creation roles! The bottom line: Stirtz has had to manage a strenuous set of offensive responsibilities the past 2 years. Regardless of where he lands in the draft, his job at the NBA level will be a lot easier. An unburdened Bennett Stirtz is capable of more than you can imagine.

High on him

My Brayden Burries hype is the one I’ve had the most debates about. It comes down to his driving ability for me. I think his strength based driving is good, but the agility he shows while doing it is close to an outlier trait, and a very good one at worst. I do value players who can get into the teeth of a defense, especially guards who can do this just because many bigs and forwards are more perimeter-based than in previous years.

Context is important to me in any evaluation, but I’d say ‘context’ has dictated this Burries eval more than any other prospect this year. People point to mediocre half-court scoring numbers from inside the arc. Given the context, 48.8 percent as per CBB Analytics is actually a good showing. Arizona are incredibly offensive rebound focused, so from around 10 seconds down on the shot clock, their bigs are parked in the paint, hunting offensive rebounds. This limits his ability to create the type of high quality 2s at the end of the shot clock. You can tell he wants to drive off the catch, and that’s my role for him at the next level.

In addition to this, I think he’s an excellent rebounder and willing defender. He’s strong, uses his body well and has decent enough foot speed. The three-point numbers are good, but I do project him to be more of an inside player. This side of his game is definitely suppressed by Arizona. I envision him as a late clock release valve for an offense, and a valuable one at that. My comp all cycle has been Malcolm Brogdon.

High on him

Philon is the one guard I am willing to bet on this year. He has a more or less ideal scoring process for a lead guard (40 3PAR/FTR, high floater frequency with good rim volume and FG%, resulting in a strong 2P%) while shouldering a massive load on a top-3 offense in the nation. Another disappointing outing at the combine, alongside a stark decline in ancillary skills with more usage, makes me question his floor once again.

The big swing skill for Philon will be his turnover influence on both sides of the ball. His own turnover rates have always been moderately high, but with Philon at the helm for the first time this year, Alabama ranked 10th in the nation in team TO%, after never cracking the top 100 in the Oats era beforehand. This was a trend that could have been anticipated by looking at Philon’s lineup data without Mark Sears on the floor last year, where his lineups had a team TO% 2.4% below the team baseline.

Furthermore, Alabama has ranked in the bottom 80 in OPP TOV% for four straight years. In this conservative environment, Philon had the highest STL% and second-highest BLK% among all Bama guards during that stretch. Positive DTOV and OREB influence, if Philon were to slot back into a smaller role at the next level, intrigues me.

There is a chance that Philon is a much bigger beneficiary of the excellent system Nate Oats has installed than I am admitting right now, but his potential as a false-ceiling candidate with ancillary adequateness (off-ball, Philon has always been a devastating player offensively, as he’s a very decisive player off the catch) is interesting enough to entertain him as a lottery-level prospect.

High on him

While Mikel has some extreme weaknesses, he’s sneakily well-rounded with extreme strengths to pair.

Statistically, he has a blend of dunking, finishing, shooting, and passing that is rare. You can generate queries to delineate this (only high major players with 8 dunks, 10 3PA/100, 83% FT, and 25% assist rate are Javon Small and Klay Thompson; extend to low major and you get Damian Lillard). But the sample size is small, and these are very different players. What’s more telling is the inherent difficulty of being able to combine these skills in the aggregate.

Mikel’s athleticism is itself rare for the position. At 6’5 with a 40 inch vertical and uber-quick shuttle/lane agility times, he takes shots that most PGs simply don’t have access to. His dunk rate and drive foul rate are standout.

His shooting profile is also excellent, perhaps the best in class. His 3P shooting rate is comical, with obvious proficiency coming off the catch and off the dribble. The audacity of his off-dribble attempts paired with the volume of spot-up threes is a unique sort of versatility that mirrors his willingness to toggle on and off the ball. Even with an excellent single-season FT% (84%), there’s a good chance that he would have finished a full college-season with a higher percentage. He has by far the best FT priors of any freshman (87%), and he made his last 25 FTs before his season was cut short.

What’s so interesting about Mikel is his passing. It’s seemingly well-agreed that Mikel isn’t nearly as good of a passer as many of the other point guards in the class. This is a reasonable take, but Mikel accumulating a 30% assist rate at 6’5, even with his high usage rate, is nonetheless an important signal. The only high major freshmen to pair a 27% assist rate and 75% FT at 6’5+ were Shai, Andrew Nembhard, and DLo. This isn’t a take about Mikel’s upside, but rather his floor: he can sustain usage while passing and shooting efficiently. On tape, I’m impressed by his pacing and ability to get to his spots. He has some devastating turnovers, which is his most worrying flaw. Given that he’s already mustering huge passing volume with some impressive flashes and unique access to passing windows with his height and burst, I can envision an easier path to turnover-trimming than most PGs.

Defensively, Mikel is likely to be poor. But at 6’5 with his athleticism, decent defensive rebounding, and average stocks, the floor is probably not worst-in-league. Mentions of lockdown guard defenders in interviews could be construed as a positive.

Mikel does too many high-signal things to pair with a number of high-signal traits. It’s indicative of a surprisingly strong offensive floor.

High on him

Steinbach rebounded like a center as a freshman, with a 14% offensive and 25% defensive rebounding rate. Among early entrants, no one else exceeded both marks. He also weighs an average amount for a center, at 248 pounds, and is 6’10.25’’ without shoes with a 7’2.25’’ wingspan. Now, add some real perimeter talent into the mix, and this player becomes very interesting.

Steinbach was a threat off the dribble, scoring nearly 1.2 points per possessions on 40 drives, both marks doubling that of fellow one-and-done big Chris Cenac (20 drives, 0.6ppp). Steinbach also shot an excellent 40% on 30 guarded catch and shoot threes and 76% from the line. Those two marks also far outpace Cenac. There is real perimeter potential here, which also shows up favorably in the passing tape.

Steinbach was far from the primary passing hub with Washington, but he was seen greasing the wheels with screening and good decision-making. When Hannes was off the court, 46% of his team’s makes were assisted, while the team turnover rate sat at 18%; when he was on, the assist rate jumped to 50%, with turnover rate declining to an acceptable 15.5%.

The on-offs are quite strong overall for Steinbach. Washington had a disastrous -0.2 net rating on 463 possessions where Steinbach sat, compared to a very strong +19.6 when he played. That impact mostly showed up in the team’s rim finishing, at 65% when he’s on compared to 46% when off. Indeed, Steinbach was an 86th percentile rim finisher, 68% overall and 67% in the half-court – this efficiency was not boosted by farming easy transition looks.

More than anything, Steinbach was simply very productive for a freshman. Of 6’10’’+ high major freshman first round picks since 2008, Steinbach ranks in the top third in Box Plus-Minus, tied with Dereck Lively and Jaxson Hayes. Sometimes, production, age, and signs of advanced skill are enough to make a pick worth it, as Steinbach seems like a clear multi-contract player.

High on him

Acuff put up one of the most efficient load-bearing offensive seasons in college basketball history. He also had strongly negative rebounding and stock rates that indicate a devastating defensive floor.

Poor defensive output is not uncommon for guards, however. Two of the best shooters ever, Damian Lillard and Steve Nash, consistently had extremely low defensive rebounding and steal rates throughout their NBA career. The intuitive refutation is that this paradigm presents a narrow path, but perhaps Acuff is suited to make it work.

The best indication would be his passing. Acuff was one of the best lob passers in the country, in transition and out of pick and roll. While this is partially a reflection of his receiving personnel, Acuff’s pin-point accuracy and ability to “initiate” these plays was standout. He ended the season with a 32% assist rate, 11.6% turnover rate, and a sparkling 3.0 A:TO. No underclassman has ever combined a 32% assist rate and sub-12 turnover rate, even at the low major ranks.

Unlike the few players in the modern era that have even come close to pairing such a high assist rate with a low turnover rate, Acuff is not primarily lauded for his passing. It’s certainly an important and accepted part of his game, but it’s somehow discussed secondarily to his scoring ability.

Acuff’s scoring volume and shooting efficiency is itself a projectable value-add: he paired a 30% usage with 60% true shooting. Much of this came from a ridiculous 44% 3P shooting on 207 three point attempts. While we can’t expect this sort of shooting goodness on an annual basis, it speaks to his inherent shooting touch, and is corroborated by high-volume midrange shotmaking and strong pre-NCAA free throw shooting.

Acuff pairs this elite shooting with a legitimate downhill game. With or without a screen, he generates a high volume of paint touches, while also able to push the pace and score efficiently in transition. He had the quickest sprint time at the NBA combine, while measuring well for the position. As such, we can expect Acuff to get to the rim in both the half-court and transition at the NBA level.

At this point, it’s hard to ignore Acuff’s upside as a load-bearing offensive engine. He can pass and avoid turnovers at an elite level, and he can efficiently score at high volume across a variety of playtypes. His 6.7 PRPG (a measure of offensive rating at usage) is the second-highest mark amongst freshmen since 2008, only behind Trae Young.

Acuff’s offensive goodness may reasonably outweigh his defensive badness. Besides, with his elite athleticism and solid frame, perhaps the defensive floor isn’t nearly as bad as his stocks or rebounding would indicate.

High on him

Identifying Jayden Quaintaince’s selling points and drawbacks is simpler than almost any other prospect in the draft. As a 17-year-old freshman, he dominated defensively playing for Arizona State, flashing All-Defensive caliber size, explosiveness, movement skills and instincts. Even after a second year in college, Quaintance is still the second-youngest player in the draft.

Quaintance only played four games as a sophomore at Kentucky (most of which did not fare well), good for 28 total college games in two seasons. A March 2025 ACL tear effectively ended his college playing career and zapped a key season of on-court development. Those health-related concerns, paired with general rawness pervading his game, render Quaintance a legitimate risk for front offices.

A brave team stands to reap immense rewards from this Pandora’s Box of an NBA Draft prospect. Quaintance, measuring a gargantuan 6-foot-9, 253 pounds with a 7-foot-5 wingspan, moves like a wing and looks like a fledgling Defensive Player of the Year at his best. Added strength in year two only enhances his elite explosiveness and fluidity.

He must sharpen his footwork, hone his awareness and progress, especially as a pick-and-roll defender, to start at center in the league, but the promise of a switchable, rim-protecting big man exists in his highest outcome range. His blaring red question marks live on offense, none greater than his abysmal free-throw shooting and general touch. Even for a player who projects as a play finisher, a career 45.2 percent free-throw clip is a dire signal.

Quaintance’s offensive flashes shine bright, though, occasionally tapping into brute-force driving and some connective passing instances. His aforementioned two-way strengths are true superpowers typical of players with universal top-five grades. Obvious confounding variables cloud that projection, but Quaintance’s ceiling is too high not to earn a star prospect grade.

High on him

There are many paths to being a lottery pick. Production, athleticism, positional size, and pedigree have all made lottery cases in the past. When a player has all four, they’re often flirting with the top overall pick. Morez Johnson Jr. has it all and is going to be a steal wherever he is picked.

At 6’9” and 250 pounds, Morez has ideal power forward size. He mixes elite run-and-jump athleticism with short-area burst and movement skills. As a sophomore transfer, he was a crucial piece to a dominant championship team. But it’s the production that truly stands out.

Morez was an elite rebounder, shot-blocker, and rim finisher for Michigan, putting together an excellent play-finisher profile. As a roll man, cutter, and dunker spot finisher, he could make his nut offensively. But it’s the flashes of midrange and three-point touch, capitalizing on mismatches, and the ability to put together one- or two-dribble combos to get into his spots that have me believing in his ceiling.

If Morez were strictly an uber-athletic two-way play finisher, the profile is there. I see much more under the surface that can break the false ceiling. In my view, he’s closer to the top end of the lottery than the bottom.

High on him

Christian Anderson Jr. has some flaws that could severely limit his NBA career and impact. He measured 6’0.75 barefoot at the NBA combine, which is 1.20 inches below the NBA average point guard height. And he plays in a unimposing way.

However, he has a solid 6’6 wingspan, recorded a 40.5 max vertical leap, and had positive agility testing at the combine. These measurements give more hope about his physicality on both ends.

He also excels at scarce skills that can lead to high-level offensive impact. He showed a unique combination of shooting and passing. He shot 42.8% on pull-up threes with volume and deep range and paired it with a pick and roll mastery that has few equals.

All things considered, he has a low but not non-existent chance of reaching a sub-star impact a lá Darius Garland.

High on him

With Jefferson, we’ve seen steady defensive impact for all four years of college. He had a steal and block rate BOTH over 3 during both years at Iowa State, and a Defensive Box Plus-Minus above five all four NCAA seasons. Where Jefferson’s improved is on offense. His scoring game may not induce a ton of optimism right now. Jefferson’s usage jumped to 27.6% this year from 22.5% the year prior. This corresponded with an effective field goal percentage decrease from 54.9% to 51.7%. In fact, Jefferson’s eFG% dropped to a putrid 43% in conference play.

I’ll concede Jefferson’s scoring dropoff in 2026 was a real issue. The good news? His playmaking took a huge leap from an already strong starting point. Jefferson’s assist rate increased from 19.6% to 27.7% last year to this year. Jefferson’s AST%:USG% ratio was 1:1 in 2026, a mark often reserved for guards, especially at this usage. Databallr also assigns 4.4 rim assists per 100 to Jefferson, good for the 99th percentile in his position.

Jefferson is already one of the best 240-pound passers in the world. He makes quick decisions and passes into tight windows in a variety of actions and situations. He’ll get creative with his deliveries by changing up his arm angles or blending his shooting motions into passes, and create high-percentage shots for teammates in the process.

There’s plenty to worry about with Jefferson. His scoring game likely won’t set the world on fire, and his run/jump athleticism may limit him on defense at the next level. Despite statistical similarities, this is a far cry from the next Draymond Green.

And yet, I have to bet on someone this smart and skilled in a 6’8, 240-pound body to carve out an impactful role in the NBA. Jefferson may not have the upside of some younger, flashier players, but he fits the mold of a player I’m prioritizing this draft to a “T.” I’m looking for elite feel, skill, cognition, and development curves.

High on him

Karim Lopez is the player who has probably moved around the most on my board over the last few months. The case for him is that he could just be an incredible driving prospect. I think his potential outlier tool is that he’s quite bendy for someone with his height and weight measurements. He can really get low and fit through gaps that you don’t see as being there. These, at the moment, are largely flashes; I’d like to see more consistency here.

He’s also quite coordinated, and, considering his play-style, he doesn’t appear to be rushed at any point or show signs of his body moving faster than his brain.

This, along with the size on defense, would be the major reasons for him bringing high-end value. He’s simply an incredibly big and strong human being with budding agility skills on offense. If he’s able to scale down to the 3, this is an incredibly valuable player. He does need to get more consistent on defense if he wants to see the floor.

I think him landing on a team with front-court spacing is probably the most ideal thing to his development. The shot isn’t quite there yet, and secondary driving might pop more on a team that has their centers playing outside or at the elbow as opposed to at the dunker spot or as a PNR Roll man.

High on him

The upside case for Bruce Thornton is easy: the ball goes in the hoop. He hits some truly rarified air when combining shooting volume with efficiency:

202 for 289 on rim attempts (70%)

321 for 661 on non-rim twos (49%)

455 for 549 on free throws (83%)

221 for 580 on threes (38%)

The closest analogue for this four-level scoring was Jalen Brunson (with extremely similar 70% / 47% / 82% / 39% splits), and he falls short of Bruce Thornton’s ball custodian abilities. Thornton has a career assist rate just shy of Brunsons’, but with a much lower turnover rate of only 10.7% (Brunson: 16%). Bruce makes hardly any mistakes on offense, while putting the ball in the basket at historically good rates on high volume.

The defense is a significant question mark, as Thornton has put up Brunson-esque numbers on that end, too. But he’s strong, with a historically high BMI at 233 pounds for a point guard (okay, probably higher than what you’d like), and still got more rebounds and blocks than Brunson did with an average vertical for his position.

Thornton is simply excellent getting to his spots. While I’d prefer a higher rim rate, his middies are an amazing last option for an offensive possession gone wrong. Combine that with his strong table-setting sensibilities with his fantastic assist-to-turnover ratio, and you have a player who can help get good looks for teammates, too.

His efficiency was truly special: 98th percentile efficiency on 141 pick-and-roll ball handler possessions, 91st percentile efficiency on 93 transition possessions, 97th percentile efficiency on 89 spot up possessions, 90th percentile efficiency on 58 off-screen possessions, 94th percentile efficiency on 40 isolation possessions. 98th percentile efficiency on layups and 94th on runners. This is a special scorer.

High on him

A traditional power forward with feel for the modern game, Chris Cenac Jr.’s outlier rebounding instincts reveal an elite skill he can rely on throughout his pro basketball career.

His shooting touch on the midrange pick-and-pop is already a short-roll go-to threat, with potential to stretch out to the 3pt line for more shooting gravity over time. Fundamental post-up moves offer a good counter option for Cenac when finding mismatches down low, or attacking closeouts methodically off pump-fakes to take advantage of that floor-stretching gravity.

Cenac’s wingspan-to-height ratio is 3rd-best in the class, which projects well for him defensively. Connective feel is revealed on both ends as an outlier rebounding talent, a help-side shot-blocker, a good kick-out passer, a grab-and-go ball-handler, and a team-first decision-maker, showing multiple pathways for Cenac to round out two-way impact in his role at the next level around his competitive edge when crashing the glass.

Combining his elite rebounding instincts, promising connective feel, impressive defensive tools and that feathery shooting touch at every level as a modern power forward who can spot some minutes at the five, Cenac flashes real skill indicators and defensive indicators to go with his proven rebounding superpower to thrive as a play-finishing rotation player with upside to develop into a complete NBA starter as a scorer, shooter, and defender.

High on him

The pitch for Cameron Carr is straightforward – a classic tale of basketball talent evaluation: shooting, positional size, length and athleticism. It’s all there for Carr. In his first season at Baylor, which served as his first real opportunity to spread his wings as a college talent, he showcased a special two-way package. In a draft that is somewhat devoid of wing prospects, Carr stands out.

While averaging close to 19 points per game on an efficient 61.8 percent true shooting, Carr launched 10.6 3-point attempts per 100 possessions (37.6 3P%) and led Baylor with a team-high 44 dunks in 33 games. Boasting a 7-foot wingspan and snappy, sudden athleticism, he posted a 3.9 percent block rate, offering plenty of dynamic flashes of weak-side rim protection. Carr and Duke’s Isaiah Evans were the only two high-major players to attempt over 10 triples per 100 possessions, shoot above 35 percent from beyond the arc and maintain a block rate of at least 2.0 percent.

It’s important to start with Carr’s jumper; it’s his strongest trait and the engine powering his offense. He consistently attempted and made tough 3-pointers off movement and off the dribble (nearly 30 percent of his triples were unassisted), and he proved to be a weapon in Baylor’s Floppy action.

Carr’s deep range and high release point give him upside as a perimeter scorer, drawing favorable comparisons to Devin Vassell and Trey Murphy III as recent high-level, jump-shooting wing prospects. It’s routine to see Carr letting it fly from deep with a foot on a logo, shooting over the top of a contesting defender. According to CBB Analytics, Carr shot nearly 38 percent on NBA-range 3-point attempts this past season on impressive volume (178 3PA).

Given his quick-trigger accuracy and deep range, Carr forces hard closeouts and attacks explosively off the catch. He can pump-and-go with minimal load time, slashing into the second level of the defense and consistently beating rotations with his burst. As he adds strength, Carr will become even more adept at navigating these waters – driving into contact with greater force and balance. Added strength should also bolster his midrange scoring, an area where he has shown comfort despite currently posting so-so efficiency numbers.

Carr doesn’t offer much as a playmaker, though he’s capable of running an empty-side pick-and-roll, and his off-ball movement bends defenses to open up lanes for teammates. However, his passing and half-court decision-making remain inconsistent. When pressured in ball-screen actions, Carr’s timing and accuracy can become erratic. He occasionally lofts blind passes into traffic or forces cutters to adjust mid-stride to handle inaccurate deliveries.

These challenges put a limitation of sorts on his offense, but in an environment with NBA-caliber spacing and gravity — and a role tailored to his strengths in shooting, cutting and relocation – Carr projects as a productive role player with scoring upside. Ultimately, he possesses the tools to scale up his volume and provide substantial scoring punch alongside elite floor-spacing.

Much will be made of Carr’s slender frame…and rightfully so. Weighing just 185 pounds, he’s exceptionally lean and routinely struggles with contact on both ends of the floor. This isn’t to say he shies away from physicality, however. Carr is willing to mix it up, but he currently lacks the functional strength to hold his ground. In Baylor’s early-season matchup against St. John’s, Carr was repeatedly knocked off-kilter by Zuby Ejiofor and Bryce Hopkins, yet he consistently got back up and continued to play. That competitiveness is a notable indicator for his long-term developmental arc. Give me a prospect who isn’t afraid of the challenge, and let’s see if we can develop him to physically handle those moments.

While core strength may never be a defining feature of his game, Carr’s frame should allow him to fill out and carry functional weight. If he bulks up, Carr will better withstand contact on both ends, particularly during screen navigation on defense, where his length can make him a major pest in rearview pursuit. Added strength will unlock the most prolific features of his game, allowing his shot-making and disruptive defensive playmaking to truly shine.

Carr possesses the recovery tools to absolutely delete shot attempts around the basket or contest out to the perimeter. He explodes off the floor, and his exceptional length is a legitimate game-changer. As modern NBA defenses prioritize multi-player rim protection and gap-heavy schemes to bother ball-handlers, Carr’s wingspan and athleticism make him a candidate to excel in these structures – if he’s able to dial in. While he must improve his overall attention to detail, the raw tools are undeniable for him to pop as a high-impact team defender while providing scalable multi-level scoring on offense.

High on him

People might be over-thinking Ament: he is tall, he can dribble, and he has decent feel for the game. The strongest signal for his feel is his free throw drawing: on 113 drives which ended possessions, he got to the line 25% of the time, compared to an only 12% turnover rate. Those are great figures, slightly better than Cameron Boozer’s 24% and 13% on the same kind of volume. This guy is 6’10’’ and can get into the teeth of the defense, even if he has serious flaws as a play finisher.

While the low report here decries his three point volume as too low, 7.9 threes per 100 possessions is still higher than Ace Bailey, Jaren Jackson or Paolo Banchero. His 79% free throw percentage points to some promise as shooter as well.

Ament will need to figure out his inside-the-arc scoring (43% from two…woof) to avoid being a true bust, but he does project as a decent defender to help shore up that. He appears to be a high motor player, managing to get stocks despite Tennessee’s more risk-averse defensive posture (he only fouled 2.7 times per 40 minutes).

I get the instinct to stare at Ament’s 52% rim finishing and heavy reliance on deep twos for scoring. But this might be a true wing spacer at 6’9.5’’ in socks who can keep your defense intact. There’s a point in the draft where that’s worth a shot in ironing out the flaws.

High on him

The Koa Peat evaluation seems to have gotten unnecessarily complicated: this is a great athlete with some ball skills. A 17% assist rate to only 13% turnover rate is extremely good for someone playing power forward.

Arizona was an elite basketball team against the NCAA’s best competition, regardless of whether Peat was on the floor or not, with his lineup boost mostly coming from improving their rim rate from 33% to 43%, with rim finishing going from 55% to 62% (vs. top 150 teams). Peat was doing for lineups what he was supposed to be doing: going at the rim.

Peat has strong transition influence, where Arizona only took 13.3 transition looks per 100 possessions when he was off, compared to 19.4 when he was on. That improvement is generally limited to ball-handling transition-pushers, encouraging for a PF.

The biggest concern is Peat’s very poor stock rates, counteracting my claim of him being a great athlete. That certainly has to improve, with a puny 1.3% steal rate and poor 2.5% block rate for his athleticism. However, he had about double those in AAU ball, suggesting maybe he just needs some more time for it to click as he ages.

Peat is an easy over-think candidate, as it’s easy to blow up the flaws and look at a poor outside shooter who can’t function as a guard. But I would be wary of writing off a player with his vertical talents who has any on-ball potential. The runway will be long, as Peat will be athletic and skilled enough for minutes as he figures the rest out.

High on him

There are certain inarguable truths to Zuby Ejiofor’s game. He’s a tough, rugged defender who offers both positional and scheme versatility, while providing reliable interior finishing and connective frontcourt passing. When you blend his multiple years of efficient, highly impactful two-way production in college with his impressive combine measurements – a 7-foot-2 wingspan and an 8-foot-11 standing reach – there’s a clear framework for a player who can crack an NBA rotation as an energy guy and defender.

Players who fit this mold are highly valuable in the regular season. They’re reliable rotation pieces who defend, battle on the glass, keep the ball moving on offense and avoid costly mistakes. While Ejiofor is big enough to hold his own in NBA frontcourts, he slightly lacks the elite measurables typical of starter-level bigs who don’t offer perimeter gravity.

This may ultimately be where Ejiofor lands, but pigeonholing him as a small-ball 5 who only injects some verve into a second unit during the six-month regular-season slog is too narrow in scope. More specifically, that outlook undersells his feel for the game and overall skill level, both of which are exceptionally high.

Ejiofor can handle the ball in space, make passes in tight windows (both out of the short roll and from the post), and initiate 5-out offenses from the elbows or top of the key. Instead of typecasting him as merely a 6-foot-8 center designed to eat innings, we should consider what Ejiofor could become as a versatile 4 or a powerful wing.

He shot just 27.7 percent on 2.3 3-point attempts per 100 possessions over his four-year college career, according to Sports Reference. However, as a senior – while anchoring a borderline Top 10 defense as the Big East Defensive Player of the Year – Ejiofor took a leap as a shooter. He knocked down 18 3-pointers (18-of-59 3PA), including a few self-created looks (three unassisted triples), and shot 43.4 percent on 2-point attempts away from the rim, per CBB Analytics. He’s also consistently been a reliable free-throw shooter, hitting 70.9 percent from the line for his career.

For now, Ejiofor’s 3-pointer remains a limiting factor of sorts despite those encouraging indicators. There’s reason for optimism, however; with technical refinement and a scaled-down offensive role (down from his heavy 26.5 percent usage rate this season), he could develop into a functional spot-up threat. Unlocking that jumper would allow the other areas of his game to truly blossom. That upside is exactly what makes him one of the premier “if he shoots it” prospects in this class – the kind of hybrid frontcourt athlete who can play alongside a traditional big.

Defensively, he’s already there. Ejiofor was the linchpin of an aggressive, switch-heavy defensive unit at St. John’s. He consistently demonstrated the ability to slide out and guard every position along the perimeter, showcasing remarkable fluidity for a 245-pounder. He carries his weight exceptionally well and moves laterally in space. Also, Ejiofor doesn’t check out of a play after containing the initial action; he immediately shifts into a relentless, disruptive gap defender who uses his long arms and quick hands to stunt, dig, and terrorize nearby ball-handlers.

While he may not be the most explosive, quick-twitch athlete, Ejiofor utilizes a 38-inch vertical, elite length, a motor that runs hot, and sharp instincts to anchor himself as an impactful weak-side rim protector. During the 2025-26 season, he posted a 7.2 percent block rate, highlighted by a staggering 15 blocks on 3-point attempts. That translated to 0.5 blocks on 3PA per 40 minutes – putting him in the 99th percentile nationally.

To put those numbers into perspective, Cooper Flagg blocked just seven 3-point attempts at Duke last season, while Hannes Steinbach rejected eight at Washington this year. Even Yaxel Lendeborg, who helped propel the defense for the national champs, led his team with only nine blocks on the perimeter. Meanwhile, Allen Graves proved how rare Ejiofor’s spatial coverage is: all 33 of the blocks Graves recorded at Santa Clara last season, according to CBB Analytics, came strictly on 2-point attempts inside the arc.

The offensive side of the floor is where things get more intriguing. Ejiofor can generate and initiate offense for both himself and others from beyond the arc; he doesn’t rely on preexisting advantages to score or function as a connective playmaker, nor does he require his touches to come strictly within 15 feet.

He plays with fluidity and force as a driver. Ejiofor can face up and blow by slower defenders along the perimeter, or utilize physical, Barkley-style backdowns when he draws a physical mismatch. Front offices searching for perimeter physicality – such as the Charlotte Hornets – should closely consider these facets of his game, especially when envisioning the various ways Ejiofor could work as a source of offense in a variety of modern conventions.

Whether it’s Pistol action in early offense or playing out of “flow” as the shot clock dwindles, Ejiofor can function as a highly effective screener who dictates matchups and creates micro-advantages for primary creators. If defenses try to switch and flatten the offense, Ejiofor serves as a reliable switch-beater, capable of driving through or backing down more slender defenders.

Of course, if those actions pull a second defender into Ejiofor’s space, he has the vision to make quick decisions and pass on the move. This generates some of the highest-value looks on the floor: assisted opportunities directly around the basket and open kick-out three-pointers.

High on him

Tarris Reed is a guy that I was very happy to see sneak inside the top 30 of our Swish Theory board. At the next level, I view Tarris Reed as a strength-based play finisher. I think UConn’s heavy off-screen offense gave him a lot of easy and deep seals just because all of the help defense would be pulled to the top of the key to defend off-screen threes. However, Tarris is strong inside and can move his man not once, but twice.

It is for this reason that I get slightly frustrated that he sometimes rushes his shots at the rim. I get it with skinnier guys who can’t sustain or even create a second advantage. But he legitimately can. He’s a smooth operator in PNRs despite his limited vert. I think he fits really well next to a guard who has a threat of a pull-up 3; he’s more at home in the short roll as opposed to as a lob threat. It allows him to use his power, and he’s lowkey a really decent short roll passer.

Defensively, he’s just really solid. I don’t think he’s a game-changing force, but he’s a solid rim protector, and due to his offensive skill you could potentially play him alongside another big. When making a pick like this, teams need to think about fit way more than they do for players at the top of the draft. The case for him isn’t particularly exciting, but I think alongside pull-up shooters, he can be a seriously good addition to your team.

High on him

When you look up a walking bucket in the dictionary, you see a picture of Meleek Thomas crossing over his defender.

Resembling a classic sixth man scorer who can catch fire at any moment, Meleek is a smooth off-the-dribble scorer and sound 3pt shooter who shows read-and-react assist-hunting passing chops as a combo guard ready to score first and ask questions later.

Meleek’s superpowers show up through his self-creation abilities, between his handle, scoring, and shooting. A tough shot maker with a highlight-worthy one-on-one game, Thomas shows off flashy handles, clean finishes at the rim, and impressive 3pt shooting in both pull-ups and catch-and-shoots.

Despite some questions defensively as an individual perimeter defender when left on an island, he shows good feel traits such as by jumping passing lanes for steals. A team could bet on Meleek as a scalable offensive talent who has upside on the ball and proven talent off the ball with two-way feel to build around.