For second-year players, Las Vegas serves an entirely different purpose. After a full season of NBA practices, strength programs, film study and, in many cases, G League development, these players are no longer trying to prove they belong in the league. They’re trying to prove they’re ready to contribute. Summer League becomes an opportunity to showcase growth, demonstrate a more polished skill set and make a case for meaningful rotation minutes entering the new season.

One strong week in Las Vegas won’t completely change a player’s long-term outlook, but it can offer valuable insight into who is beginning to put everything together. With that in mind, here are 10 second-year standouts who have looked ready to earn a more consequential NBA role heading into the 2026-27 season.

Tre Johnson (Washington Wizards)

The Wizards are expected to take a significant step forward this season. While much of the conversation surrounding Washington will center on No. 1 overall pick AJ Dybantsa, along with veterans Trae Young and Anthony Davis, the internal development of the roster will be just as important to the team’s success.

One player with a real chance to make a significant leap is Tre Johnson, Washington’s premier draft pick from a year ago. After a promising rookie campaign, Johnson looks poised to become an even more dynamic scorer in Year 2. From his first Summer League appearance, he looked every bit like one of the best players on the floor, showcasing the effortless shot-making ability that gives him legitimate 20-point-per-game upside at the NBA level.

Exactly what Johnson’s role looks like on a nightly basis remains to be seen, especially with several established creators already on the roster. But whenever those opportunities come, his ability to create offense for himself should make him an impactful piece of Washington’s rotation.

Will Riley (Washington Wizards)

Johnson wasn’t the only Wizard to stand out in Las Vegas. In fact, Will Riley may be one of the most underrated young players anywhere on Washington’s roster.

Through his first two Summer League games, Riley established himself as one of the event’s most prolific scorers while knocking down an incredibly high percentage of his 3-point attempts. His shot-making was impressive, but perhaps even more encouraging was how naturally his game fits alongside the roster Washington is building.

Riley still has room to add strength and continue rounding out his game, but his positional size, length and shooting ability project seamlessly alongside jumbo creators like Dybantsa and the rest of the Wizards’ young core. If his Summer League performance is any indication, Riley has a legitimate opportunity to emerge as an important bench contributor this season.

Liam McNeeley (Charlotte Hornets)

The new-look Hornets will be one of the more fascinating teams to follow this season after trading away LaMelo Ball. Charlotte is entering a new era built around Kon Knueppel and Brandon Miller, creating new opportunities for young players like Liam McNeeley to establish themselves.

McNeeley isn’t expected to be one of Charlotte’s primary scorers, but through his few Summer League appearances, he showed he can impact the game in a variety of ways. Long regarded as one of the better shooters in his class dating back to high school, McNeeley also displayed impressive feel as a passer and secondary playmaker, averaging more than three assists per game during the opening stretch in Las Vegas.

For McNeeley, that’s the key to carving out a long-term NBA role. His shooting will always be his calling card, but continuing to find ways to impact winning beyond simply making shots will ultimately determine how large his role becomes with the Hornets.

Chaz Lanier (Detroit Pistons)

The Pistons made it clear this offseason that improving their perimeter shooting was a priority. After a breakthrough regular season and a playoff appearance, Detroit added proven shooters like Isaiah Joe and Kevin Huerter to better complement Cade Cunningham.

Chaz Lanier could quietly become part of that equation in Year 2.

An older prospect who spent five seasons at the college level, Lanier once again showcased why he’s regarded as one of the better volume shooters in his class. He has been one of the most impressive volume perimeter shooters of the summer and has proven he can shoulder plenty of offensive responsibility at this level.

Lanier isn’t expected to play a major role for the Pistons as a sophomore, but there’s a clear pathway to earning meaningful minutes. If he can continue spacing the floor, hold his own defensively, make quick decisions as a passer and consistently knock down open shots, Detroit has every reason to trust him as a complementary piece on a playoff-caliber roster.

Egor Dёmin (Brooklyn Nets)

The Nets are still waiting for one of their young prospects to truly establish himself as the face of the franchise’s future. After selecting five players in the first round a year ago and following that up by landing Mikel Brown Jr. in the 2026 NBA Draft, Brooklyn has no shortage of intriguing young talent.

While Brown may have the clearest path toward becoming the organization’s cornerstone, Egor Dёmin shouldn’t be overlooked.

With his unique combination of size, ball-handling and playmaking ability, Dёmin immediately stood out during his limited Summer League action. He looked a step ahead of the competition, controlling the game with his pace while showing flashes of the versatility that made him such an intriguing prospect entering the league.

If Dёmin can carry that momentum into high-impact NBA minutes that lend to winning this season, it won’t be long before he’s on the brink of truly breaking out as a star. One year from now, he could very well be viewed as one of the league’s most promising young players.

Joan Beringer (Minnesota Timberwolves)

The Timberwolves made one of the splashiest moves of the offseason by acquiring LaMelo Ball to pair with Anthony Edwards, a move that also required parting ways with Julius Randle and reshaping parts of the roster. While much of the attention has focused on Minnesota’s revamped backcourt, Joan Beringer quietly put together one of the most impressive Summer League performances among second-year bigs and should spark conversations about the frontcourt rotation.

Beringer likely won’t share many minutes alongside Rudy Gobert, but what he showed in Las Vegas suggested he’s already capable of filling the backup center role while potentially positioning himself as Gobert’s long-term successor. That’s no small task considering Gobert’s defensive résumé, but Beringer flashed many of the same traits that have made the veteran so valuable for playoff teams. Through his first Summer League appearance, he was an elite rebounder, protected the rim at a high level and showed more offensive polish than many expected.

He’s still not the stretch big many NBA teams covet, but Minnesota’s system has long shown it can thrive with a non-shooting center. If Beringer continues progressing, there’s a clear path to meaningful rotation minutes this season whenever Gobert rests or misses time, with the potential for an even larger role in the years ahead.

Adou Thiero (Los Angeles Lakers)

Speaking of roster overhauls, few teams changed more than the Lakers. Outside of Luka Dončić and Austin Reaves, much of Los Angeles’ core rotation looks different entering the season, creating opportunities for young players to establish themselves over the course of an 82-game schedule.

While rookie Cameron Carr impressed during Summer League, second-year wing Adou Thiero may be just as important to the Lakers’ long-term outlook.

The biggest question surrounding Thiero remains his perimeter shooting, and through his first two Summer League games, that jumper still looked like a work in progress. But everything else that makes him intriguing was on full display. His athleticism, defensive intensity, transition play and ability to finish around the basket consistently impacted winning, even when the shot wasn’t falling.

For a Lakers team trying to prove it can compete around Dončić for years to come, the development of players like Thiero matters. If he embraces an energy role, becomes a disruptive defender and continues thriving in transition alongside one of the league’s best playmakers, there’s a very realistic pathway to meaningful rotation minutes this season.

Noah Penda (Orlando Magic)

Penda entered the league with plenty of intrigue following the 2025 NBA Draft, but after spending much of his rookie season developing behind the scenes, he arrived in Las Vegas looking like one of Summer League’s biggest surprises.

Through his first two appearances, Penda showcased far more than just reliable spot-up shooting. He created offense for himself, knocked down movement threes, looked comfortable attacking with the ball in his hands and consistently made the right play. His passing flashes stood out, he rebounded at a high level and showed the versatility teams covet from modern jumbo wings.

The Magic have spent the past few seasons pushing their chips toward the middle in pursuit of becoming a legitimate championship contender. Players like Penda could quietly become an important part of that equation. Whether it’s helping secure regular season wins or eventually carving out a complementary playoff role, his Summer League performance suggested he may be ready for a much larger opportunity than many expected.

Cedric Coward (Memphis Grizzlies)

There’s a legitimate argument that Cedric Coward was almost too accomplished to even be playing in NBA Summer League after the rookie season he put together. While his shooting efficiency wasn’t where he’d like it to be during his return to Las Vegas, the rest of his game more than made up for it.

In his limited Summer League appearances, Coward rebounded at an elite level for his position, showcased outstanding playmaking ability and once again proved why his defensive versatility is so highly regarded. Even during stretches when the jumper wasn’t falling, he still controlled games in a variety of ways.

Perhaps the biggest takeaway was simply how comfortable he looked. There were moments where Coward appeared to be operating at a completely different level than everyone else on the floor. Despite some uneven shooting splits, he consistently looked like one of the best players in the building.

The Grizzlies may not be expected to contend immediately, but Coward has all the tools to emerge as one of the league’s premier second-year players. Alongside teammate Cameron Boozer, he gives Memphis another foundational building block capable of leading the franchise into its next era.

Khaman Maluach (Phoenix Suns)

Maluach looked understandably raw during his rookie season on a Suns team focused on winning immediately, limiting his opportunities to develop through consistent NBA minutes. Entering Year 2, however, the outlook feels very different.

He may not open the season as Phoenix’s starting center with Mark Williams on the roster, but there’s a realistic path for Maluach to earn that role before the year is over. He still has moments where his processing lags behind the speed of the game and there are defensive rotations he’ll continue learning, but the flashes have become increasingly difficult to ignore.

During his time in Las Vegas, Maluach dominated the glass, scored efficiently, showed legitimate shooting touch from beyond the arc and consistently impacted the game as a rim protector. Just as importantly, his energy was contagious, elevating the intensity of the group whenever he was on the floor.

If he continues refining the processing side of the game and becomes more comfortable within Phoenix’s defensive scheme, Maluach’s sophomore season could look dramatically different from his rookie campaign. Few players from the 2025 draft class appear better positioned to make a significant Year 2 leap.

Summer League is rarely about proving who can score the most points. For second-year players, it’s about demonstrating growth, showing that the game has slowed down and proving they’re ready for a larger role when training camp arrives. While there is still plenty of offseason left before opening night, these 10 players have already strengthened their cases to become meaningful contributors during the 2026-27 season.

The post Second-Year Standouts: Which Sophomores Look Ready for a More Significant NBA Role? appeared first on Swish Theory.

These aren’t necessarily players expected to average 25 points per game or contend for NBA Rookie of the Year. Instead, they’re first-year players who could be asked to fill meaningful rotation minutes for teams with aspirations of making deep postseason runs. That responsibility may look different depending on the roster. It could be eight dependable minutes in the middle of a tight game. It could be drawing an assignment against one of the opposing team’s top scorers for a stretch. It could be providing energy as a rim-running big, cleaning the glass, or simply giving a veteran starter a reliable breather.

With that in mind, there are also a handful of cases around the league where rookies will be expected to play significant roles in playoff pushes and even emerge as one of their team’s top three scorers as early as Year 1.

Whether these rookies ultimately start or come off the bench, NBA Summer League represents the first opportunity to begin adapting to the NBA’s speed, physicality and style of play. For playoff-caliber teams, that process matters. Every meaningful possession a rookie can handle by April is one less burden on an established veteran.

What’s particularly interesting about the 2026 NBA Draft is not just the talent at the top or the depth throughout the class, but the number of first-round picks who could play real roles on bonafide playoff-caliber teams from Day 1. This isn’t about players like Darius Acuff, who could put up impressive numbers for the Sacramento Kings, or Cameron Boozer, who could be a borderline All-Star in his first season for a Memphis Grizzlies team that isn’t expected to be in the playoff mix. Those players may have larger individual workloads, but they aren’t stepping into the same team context.

Instead, this list focuses on organizations that should be in the playoff picture barring unforeseen circumstances. Nearly one-third of the league fits a description of a team that has postseason expectations while also having selected a first-round rookie capable of contributing immediately. Some will be counted on as rotation pieces from opening night. Others may begin the season in smaller roles before becoming valuable depth as the year unfolds. Either way, these are the 10 playoff-caliber teams whose rookie classes could quietly play an important role in shaping the 2026-27 season.

Oklahoma City Thunder

Rookies: Bennett Stirtz, Aday Mara

The Thunder entered the offseason facing a looming financial crunch, ultimately moving on from Isaiah Joe and Aaron Wiggins in an effort to manage the salary cap. Even before those departures, there was already a sense that Oklahoma City would need to rely on inexpensive rookie contributors as it looks to return to the NBA Finals after falling short last season.

That helps explain why the Thunder targeted two experienced, multi-year college players in Bennett Stirtz and Aday Mara. Rather than swinging on long-term upside, Oklahoma City prioritized prospects capable of contributing sooner rather than later.

Mara appears to have the clearest path to meaningful minutes, particularly if injuries surface in the frontcourt again. His size, rim protection and interior presence could make him a valuable second-unit contributor whenever his number is called. Stirtz, meanwhile, offers some of the shooting, shot creation and offensive versatility the Thunder lost with Joe and Wiggins no longer on the roster. Even if his role isn’t massive from opening night, there should be opportunities throughout an 82-game season for him to provide meaningful bench production.

It’s also worth mentioning Thomas Sorber, who technically enters the season as a rookie after missing all of last year with a torn ACL. While he wasn’t part of the 2026 draft class, he’ll effectively be another first-year frontcourt player the Thunder could lean on if injuries become a factor.

San Antonio Spurs

Rookies: Tarris Reed Jr., Jayden Quaintance

Jayden Quaintance’s availability remains one of the bigger questions entering the season as he continues recovering from lingering knee issues, but Tarris Reed Jr. was one of the clearest need-based selections of the first round.

One of San Antonio’s few weaknesses last season was its lack of a dependable backup center behind Victor Wembanyama. Reed arrives after proving himself as a productive, winning player at the college level, bringing physicality, strength and athleticism to the position.

While Luke Kornet provides veteran stability, Reed offers a different dimension that could prove valuable in certain matchups. He’s still a rookie with plenty of development ahead of him, but there should be situations throughout both the regular season and the playoffs where his skill set fills a need for a Spurs team with postseason aspirations.

Los Angeles Lakers

Rookies: Cameron Carr

The Lakers underwent significant roster turnover this offseason. Luka Dončić and Austin Reaves remain the headliners, but much of the supporting cast looks different heading into the new season.

Even after adding depth pieces, Los Angeles still has questions on the wing, creating an opportunity for Cameron Carr to carve out a role. Carr is an athletic wing with intriguing defensive upside despite his slender frame, while also possessing the ability to score at all three levels.

He won’t be asked to carry the offense on a veteran team built around established stars, but the Lakers will need reliable bench production throughout the season. Carr has the tools to become an energy piece capable of defending multiple positions, running the floor and providing instant offense when called upon.

Golden State Warriors

Rookies: Yaxel Lendeborg

The Warriors are still weighing options to improve the roster and make another championship push in the final years of the Stephen Curry-Draymond Green era. Golden State has already been connected to several big names, including LeBron James, but the Jimmy Butler injury still looms as one of the biggest swing factors of the season.

While Butler could return at some point, especially later in the year or in the playoffs, his absence leaves a massive void on the wing and in the frontcourt. That type of player is incredibly difficult to replace, given his salary slot and two-way impact, which is why drafting Yaxel Lendeborg was so important.

Lendeborg will be 24 years old as a rookie and brings championship experience from the college level. He began his collegiate career playing the five before developing into more of a perimeter-oriented forward who can operate with the ball in his hands. That makes him an ideal fit for Golden State’s system and current roster needs.

He should be ready to play real minutes immediately, and the Warriors may end up leaning on him more heavily than nearly any other rookie in this class. It’s still fair to wonder whether Golden State is a true contender as currently constructed, but there is no question the Warriors should be competitive in the Western Conference, and Lendeborg could have a direct impact on how much success they ultimately have.

Atlanta Hawks

Rookies: Zuby Ejiofor, Kingston Flemings

The Hawks were one of the big winners of the draft, landing two strong pieces for both the present and the future.

Kingston Flemings is a dynamic point guard with tough shot-making ability and defensive upside. In this new era without Trae Young, he has a clear path to becoming Atlanta’s long-term starting point guard. His two-way impact and ability to play within a structured system were evident as a freshman in Kelvin Sampson’s program at Houston, which should have him well-equipped for the next level.

He’ll still have plenty to learn early in his career, but Flemings should immediately be a key piece of the Hawks’ backcourt rotation.

Zuby Ejiofor, meanwhile, gives Atlanta a different type of rookie contributor. He’s a high-motor transition threat who plays with physicality and athleticism, though his exact NBA role will be interesting to track. He’s a bit undersized to play center full-time and doesn’t necessarily have a traditional perimeter skill set, even if he can knock down 3-pointers with a reliable level of accuracy.

For Ejiofor, it’s all about finding his spot in the rotation and establishing what kind of player archetype he’ll become at the NBA level. Still, he’s a winning player with experience and an NBA-ready frame. At minimum, he gives the Hawks another rotation piece who thrives in the open court and has the ability to impact the game on both ends.

Philadelphia 76ers

Rookies: Labaron Philon Jr.

After trading away Jared McCain at last year’s deadline, the Sixers made a clear pivot toward acquiring draft capital while creating more financial flexibility to retain Quentin Grimes, who ultimately still ended up with the Los Angeles Lakers. That left Philadelphia in a situation where two of its core rotation guards from the start of last season would no longer be on the roster.

However, the pick acquired from Oklahoma City in the McCain trade ultimately turned into Labaron Philon Jr., the guard who fell further than almost anyone in the draft. A two-year college player, Philon is a dynamic scorer and extremely underrated passer who could have gone in the lottery, but instead landed with the Sixers at No. 22.

Philadelphia then turned around and traded for Jaylen Brown, building what is now one of the best rosters in the Eastern Conference, with the possibility of still pursuing another major piece like LeBron James. Given the year-over-year changes in the backcourt, Philon projects as a quality bench contributor who can facilitate, create offense and score behind what is shaping up to be one of the NBA’s best starting lineups.

Toronto Raptors

Rookies: Allen Graves

The Raptors have been one of the big winners of the summer, bringing back Kawhi Leonard in a splashy trade that puts them right back into contention in the Eastern Conference. But before that move, Toronto drafted Allen Graves, one of the more interesting swing players in the class.

Graves was a sixth man at Santa Clara, but also one of the best players in the conference and an analytics darling throughout the pre-draft process. There is certainly a world in which his game doesn’t translate quite as well as some expect, especially if the athleticism fails to pop at the NBA level or if certain skill areas aren’t as polished against better competition.

At the same time, the advanced data suggests Graves could become a phenomenal NBA player and one of the steals of the draft. For the Raptors, the short-term appeal is clear. His versatility, positional flexibility and ability to impact the game in different ways should give him a real role as a rookie.

That role will likely be more complementary and niche off the bench early on, but as injuries happen and different playoff matchups emerge, don’t be surprised if Graves becomes an important piece for Toronto.

Charlotte Hornets

Rookies: Christian Anderson, Hannes Steinbach

The Hornets have been one of the most surprising teams of the offseason. After having one of their best years in recent franchise history, nearly making the playoffs after a fun late-season push, Charlotte made the NBA Play-In Tournament before ultimately falling short.

Then, the franchise opted to trade LaMelo Ball to the Minnesota Timberwolves, sparking a new era built around Kon Knueppel and Brandon Miller. From there, the Hornets also traded away Miles Bridges, but they added two quality rookies along the way who could help this team immediately.

Christian Anderson is a poised point guard who has operated offenses at a high level internationally and collegiately despite being undersized. He’s a smart, cerebral, winning player who can score and create for others, and with Ball no longer in the equation, Anderson should have a real chance to earn significant point guard reps in Year 1. There will be struggles at times, as this is a completely different level of basketball, but if anyone can make the adjustment quickly, Anderson can.

Steinbach is not a direct replacement for Bridges, but he’s a phenomenal rebounder who should have plenty of opportunity in Charlotte right away. The German frontcourt prospect could be the franchise’s long-term starter in the frontcourt, bringing the ability to set strong screens, clean the glass and score in a variety of ways. If Steinbach’s 3-point shot comes around, this could become one of the best rookie duos in the league this season.

Charlotte should expect quite a bit of production from both rookies in Year 1.

Washington Wizards

Rookies: AJ Dybantsa

The Wizards have made it clear they’re ready to start winning now. During the 2025-26 season, Washington acquired Anthony Davis and Trae Young before extending Young on a max contract, while also exploring a long-term extension with Davis. At the same time, the organization’s young core has gained valuable experience. Alex Sarr, Bilal Coulibaly, Bub Carrington, Tre Johnson, Keyshawn George and Will Riley are no longer simply intriguing prospects; they’re players expected to contribute to winning basketball.

Now, the Wizards add AJ Dybantsa, the No. 1 overall pick in the 2026 NBA Draft and a prospect with legitimate face-of-the-franchise potential.

As talented and deep as Washington is on the wing and in the frontcourt, there’s no question Dybantsa will be featured as one of the focal points of the offense from Day 1. The Wizards have assembled a playoff-caliber roster, but just how high they climb in the Eastern Conference standings could very well depend on how quickly Dybantsa adapts to the NBA.

If he delivers a Rookie of the Year-caliber campaign, Washington has the talent to finish comfortably in the top six of the East. If he struggles, or is simply an average rookie, the Wizards could instead find themselves battling through the Play-In Tournament. That level of influence speaks to both Dybantsa’s talent and just how heavily Washington plans to lean on him from the start.

Utah Jazz

Rookies: Darryn Peterson

Peterson may very well be the best guard prospect to enter the NBA Draft in the last decade. With elite size for a guard, scoring ability, athleticism and defensive tools, he possesses the type of ceiling that could eventually produce scoring titles, MVP consideration and perennial All-NBA appearances. His landing spot only makes things more intriguing. Like Washington, Utah accelerated its timeline with in-season moves, highlighted by the acquisition of Jaren Jackson Jr.

Peterson joins a roster featuring established star Lauri Markkanen, rising guard Keyonte George, last year’s top-five pick Ace Bailey and one of the bigger, more versatile rotations in the league.

The Jazz expect Peterson to step into a starting backcourt role immediately, and there’s every reason to believe he’ll have every opportunity to flourish. Summer League production should always be taken with a grain of salt, but combined with his pedigree and the player he was entering the draft, it’s easy to envision Peterson emerging as the Rookie of the Year favorite and ultimately the best player in this class.

Utah has assembled a playoff-caliber roster, and if Peterson hits the ground running, the Jazz have enough talent to skip the typical Play-In progression altogether and push for a top-six seed in an incredibly competitive Western Conference. That possibility is exactly why Peterson is one of the most important rookies on any playoff-caliber team entering the 2026-27 season.

The NBA Summer League doesn’t determine whether these rookies become stars, but it offers the first glimpse into how quickly they can help winning teams. For organizations with playoff aspirations, every reliable rotation piece matters, making the development of this rookie class more important than ever. Whether it’s a spot-up shooter, a defensive stopper or a future franchise cornerstone, these first-year players could quietly shape the 2026-27 playoff race more than most realize.

The post Why Rookie Production Could Shape the 2026-27 Playoff Race appeared first on Swish Theory.

With the 2026 NBA draft in the books, all eyes turn to Summer League to see what players have been working on in their early days with new teams. Here’s one item we’ll be watching closely for each team’s top rookie. Find our full Big Board here.

Atlanta Hawks: Kingston Flemings’ rim finishing

There’s a lot to like about Flemings’ game, but his finishing at the rim is an early-career concern. As our low report noted, Kingston shot just 53% at the rim in conference play. Additionally, can he learn to draw fouls on these rim attempts? A crafty, ultra-high-feel player, Kingston might already be prepared to show new finishing tricks this summer.

Boston Celtics: Chris Cenac’s shot diet

Cenac displayed good outside touch for a player of his size at Houston. However, he had a heavy preference for taking catch-and-shoot looks from deep two rather than three. How quickly can Boston correct his shot diet to better fit their three-heavy system?

Brooklyn Nets: Mikel Brown ancillary production

Although the pitch for Mikel is easy, a high volume shooter with some passing and handling chops, can he contribute elsewhere on the court? Our low report highlighted his poor stock and rebound rates, which hopefully look better this summer, especially with more time to recover from injuries which limited him at Louisville.

Charlotte Hornets: Hannes Steinbach’s passing

While he did not have the best assist volume, our high report noted Washington’s team passing improved when Steinbach was on the court, perhaps greasing the wheels even without the assists. How will his passing look with his new team – is there untapped potential?

Chicago Bulls: Caleb Wilson’s defensive impact

While his stock rates were very good, Wilson’s defensive on-offs were mediocre for someone of his talents. In the Summer League setting, it will be interesting to see if Wilson locks in and contributes like his potential indicates. Our low report noted a tendency to take plays off and skip second efforts…will that be the case again in low-stakes play?

Cleveland Cavaliers: Meleek Thomas’ inside the arc scoring

Meleek does plenty of good as a perimeter player, particularly as a passer, taking calculated risks, and as a catch-and-shoot three-point shooter. However, his inside-the-arc shooting percentage of only 45% is a huge red flag – will this look better in the Cavs’ system? We might see hints of what he’s been working on to correct this imbalance in his game in the Summer League tape.

Dallas Mavericks: Morez Johnson’s scoring burden

Morez’s improved outside touch was essential for national champion Michigan, but he still took relatively few three pointers, and rarely had self-creation reps. Is there more scoring upside than meets the eye with Johnson? Will he be able to take advantage of the favorable matchups and  open looks that will be the norm when playing with Cooper Flagg?

Denver Nuggets: Trevon Brazile’s continued feel progression

Many wrote off Brazile as an NBA contributor considering his apparent poor feel for the game he displayed in his early NCAA seasons. However, he fit snugly into his role with Arkansas this past season, becoming one of the best play finishing athletes in the country. His turnover rate plummeted, despite creating more rim attempts. Will we continue to see him play within his role, or will the issues come back against better opponents?

Detroit Pistons: Ebuka Okorie’s passing role

Okorie took on an enormous scoring load for Stanford as a freshman, which likely led to a depressed assist rate. However, just what is Okorie’s ceiling as a passer? Is he someone you want initiating every time down the floor, or will he be too score-first? Does his ultra-low turnover rate in college mean capacity for more passing? Summer League might begin to answer these questions.

Golden State Warriors: Yaxel Lendeborg’s three-point volume

Swish Theory is confident in Lendeborg’s value, our number six ranked player with little dispersion of opinion among our 10 rankers. However, will his role look more like this one at UAB, where he spent more time as a driver and enforcer inside the arc, or will he keep building on the three point volume he showed at Michigan (to great success). Given the Warriors’ habits, high three point volume is the assumption, but Yaxel’s malleability makes the details of his role an open question.

Houston Rockets: Bruce Thornton’s rim pressure

Swish Theory was very high on Thornton, ranking him #23 with some placing him much higher. Our low report mentioned an inability to get into the paint without a screen, and his rim to non-rim ratio was extremely low with a predilection for deep pull-up twos. However, Thornton was highly efficient when he did get there, perhaps hinting at untapped rim volume. Summer League might begin to reveal these answers.

Indiana Pacers: Braden Smith’s physical presence

The Pacers’ 38th pick, Braden Smith has been one of the best drivers of measuring 5’10.25’’ and 167 pounds at the Combine. The relative draft capital spent by Indiana suggests they believe Smith can still be acceptable enough defensively to see spot floor time. Will he, however, prove overwhelmed by Summer League size and strength?

Los Angeles Clippers: Keaton Wagler, offensive focal point

Keaton Wagler is one of the few draft picks going to a team with a worse offensive roster than he had in college. While Wagler proved more than capable as a three point shooter and ball mover, he was surrounded by strong play finishers where many assists came off of simple passes. Will he be able to scale up to force the defense into rotation more than he did in college? This will be a big test for that question.

Los Angeles Lakers: Cameron Carr’s passing

Carr is far from an offensive conductor, and is an older rookie, but still showed some flashes of difficult reads, mainly on the move. Do the Lakers even care to utilize and develop this skill, or is he good enough of a play finisher it doesn’t matter for their system? In Summer League, role change is more important to note than volatile raw box score stats.

Memphis Grizzlies: Cameron Boozer, proven winner

Boozer has been a winner at every level of basketball he’s played, part of why he was Swish Theory’s consensus number one prospect this draft. It can be difficult for even top picks to get their bearings in Summer League, with little time to practice together and most playing in new schemes. Will Boozer continue to assert his will, regardless of this chaotic context? While many future All Stars did not in their first Summer League, Boozer’s skillset is potentially versatile enough to hit the ground sprinting.

Miami Heat: What kind of guard is Ryan Conwell?

Conwell went ten spots higher than Swish Theory’s board, but it’s always tough to bet against a player in Miami’s development system. Conwell’s weakness to some might be strengths to others. His assist volume and three-point accuracy were highly volatile this season, as he had eight <25% three point shooting games and eight games with one or zero assists. I’d assume Miami will give him all the green lights, but they might be able to find more passing upside, too.

Milwaukee Bucks: Brayden Burries showing us the special

“Show me the weakness.” Even our low report noted Burries’ versatility in college. But does he have an area of the court he can dominate and prove he has the same upside of players taken around him? As an old freshman (almost 21), the pressure is a little higher on Burries than his much younger counterparts to hit the ground running.

Minnesota Timberwolves: Isaiah Evans’ rim protection

Evans made a massive leap as a shotblocker his sophomore season at Duke, providing legitimate help-side rim prohtection, utilizing his 97th percentile standing reach as a shooting guard. Is this a trait which will carry over with a major leap in competition? Will his lithe frame limit his shotblocking?

New Orleans Pelicans: Kobe Bufkin, reclamation project

The Pelicans have zero players on their Summer League roster who were on the Swish Theory Big Board. More interesting is what former #15 pick Kobe Bufkin will look like on the court. Despite never getting his sea legs in the big league, Bufkin shot light out in the G League this past season – 56% from two (8.5 attempts per game), 42% from three (7.0 attempts per game), and 90% from the line (4.0 attempts per game under the G League’s 1-FT rule). Those splits are impressive regardless of comp – can he keep the hot shooting up?

New York Knicks: Tyler Nickel’s defense

The Knicks’ top draft pick, Jack Kayil (taken 39th), was the highest selection of anyone not on Swish’s Big Board. However, their #47 draft pick, Tyler Nickel was taken one spot later than our rank. Nickel’s deep shooting is legit, with his shot chart extending many feet behind the line. Nickel went late due to his lack of well-roundedness at Vanderbilt, a subpar athlete with only 36 rim attempts on the season 1.2 assists per game. However, he plays hard and blocks the occasional shot at 6’6’’ in socks. If he can lock in as a defender, NBA minutes might be there given the rarity of his deep spot up shooting at wing size.

Oklahoma City Thunder: Aday Mara and Bennett Stirtz synergy

The Thunder was largely in line with the Swish Theory Board, where we had Mara #10 and Stirtz #12. Mara’s upside is tied to him being a passing hub, one of the best among all bigs in the country, and at 7’3’’. Stirtz was heavily on-ball at Iowa, but would benefit immensely from getting easier reads created for him. As bench players to start their career, Stirtz’s quick-release shotmaking could be greatly enhanced by Mara finding him in a timely manner.

Orlando Magic: Izaiyah Nelson’s physicality

Nelson was taken right around where Swish had him, and with wide agreement on him looking more like an end of bench player. The big question mark is around Nelson’s applied physicality: his free throw rate skyrocketing this year, his first in the American conference where his team, South Florida, was dominant. But he’s very skinny for a likely-power forward, and neither does his experience against mostly mid major competition inspire belief in this translation.

Philadelphia 76ers: Labaron Philon’s offense-defense usage

Philon saw a sharp increase in his offensive burden this season following his freshman year. His defensive effort was replaced by a heavy dosage of pick and roll operation, #14 in the country in PNR ballhandler volume (possessions finished, including on passes). While this surely was part of the appeal for the Sixers, on a team with players who need the ball, Philon will have to ratchet back up that effort on the defensive end. Very lightweight for an NBA player at 176, and a mediocre athlete, Philon will instead have to rely on effort and technique.

Phoenix Suns: Koa Peat’s playmaking

Peat’s fell on Swish Theory’s Board with each new iteration over the 2026 cycle, with little disagreement in putting him in the 20s by the time of the draft. However, he’s still a one-and-done freshman who is a big wing with some ball skills. Peat is another one whose college team could beat his Summer League squad, meaning he may receive some meaningful playmaking reps this Summer League. Can he flash the creation upside – particularly as a drive and kick player – that had our team first excited about his NBA prospects?

Portland Trail Blazers: Yang Hansen, post operator

With no players on the Summer League roster on Swish Theory’s Big Board, we look to last year’s top pick, Yang Hansen, for analysis. Yang had a rough year in the big league, but had little opportunity to stretch his legs as a post hub, which had to be a major factor in their decision to take him so high in the 2025 draft. Can Yang have the game slow down for him, in what should be a favorable environment for the 7’1’’ center just turned 21? With little competition for touches, expect Yang to have his moments as a distributor.

Sacramento Kings: Darius Acuff’s defense

Swish Theory had Acuff ranked low, at #17, largely due to his poor defensive outlook. Acuff is not without tools on that end, a good athlete, but struggled mightily to be positive at the college level. The Kings desperately need Acuff to hit the ground running as their potential lead guard, and him improving even a little bit defensively could go a long way. Check to see how much he’s buying in on that end early on in his career.

San Antonio Spurs: Tarris Reed’s passing

Reed took a sudden leap as a passer in UConn’s smooth-running offense this season. However, how much was due to Hurley’s ability to optimize roles? Reed was not making any majorly complex reads, but went from one of the worst distributors in college basketball as an underclassman to more than capable of keeping the gears running at UConn. Which one will be closer to the truth at the NBA level?

Toronto Raptors: The Toronto Wrecking Balls

The Raptors have been very much in sync with Swish Theory’s drafting philosophy, taking our #3 prospect Collin Murray-Boyles with the #9 pick last year and our #9 prospect Allen Graves at 19 this year (both of our ranks being far above consensus). The two have very similar profiles: big wings or small bigs with some dribble-pass-shoot ability, but mostly devastating defenders who create countless stocks. Expect Toronto to have the best defense in Summer League when both are on the court.

Utah Jazz: Darryn Peterson passing

Peterson followed up his 2 assist, 8 turnover Summer League debut with a 12-assist passing clinic in game two. Despite being our consensus #2 prospect, opinions still varied across our team regarding just how good of a passer Darryn is, or can be. He showed more promise pre-NCAA, but passing with Kansas left a lot to be desired (it certainly was not the optimum context). Perhaps more time healthy has given Peterson more stability as a passer, with benefits immediately obvious the second he puts on a Jazz uniform.

Washington Wizards: AJ Dybantsa’s on-ball scaling

There was a high degree of disagreement over Dybantsa’s rank on the Swish Theory Board, finishing as our #4 prospect. Some of this relative pessimism revolves around AJ’s role optimization: his upside is largely tied to him being on-ball often, but shot diet of deep twos and mediocre assist-to-usage ratio leave some lingering questions around how that looks in practice. Considering he’ll be playing off of Trae Young, Dybantsa will certainly have to scale down situationally. Will the Wizards have AJ initiate every time down right off the bat in Summer League? Or are they already preparing for him to become more of a spot up shooter and/or cutter?

The post ’26 Summer League Rookie Watch List appeared first on Swish Theory.

I’ll take a 30,000 foot view of the prospects in Golden State’s range, and explain why I’d take that player or pass on them. For this exercise, I’m omitting players I am 100% convinced will be gone by 11, such as Brayden Burries, Mikel Brown Jr., and Kingston Flemings.

Going through prospects being mocked to Golden State’s range, I played “Draft or Pass” with each potential Warriors pick:

Draft: Morez Johnson Jr. (Forward/Big, Michigan)

It’s been some time since I’ve been able to run enough tape for a full draft board. But I do my best to keep tabs on things and watch games when I can. The top four is clear between Cam Boozer, Darryn Peterson, AJ Dybantsa, and Caleb Wilson. After that, the top players are up for debate. I’m certain that the fifth-best player in this class, Morez Johnson Jr., is going to be available at 11. If the Warriors don’t jump on the chance to draft Morez, I am going to be quite upset.

A lot of Morez being under-hyped comes down to anchoring bias and context. Johnson was a four-star recruit who didn’t crack the top 25 on the major platforms, and was a medium-usage bench piece as a freshman at Illinois. Transferring to Michigan put him in a bigger role, starting all 40 games, but he fell under the shadow of Yaxel Lendeborg. Consensus seems to be that Yaxel is the better draft prospect, an assumption I strongly disagree with.

A powerfully built forward-center type, Johnson put on a show at the draft combine. He is 6’9″ with a +6.5 inch wingspan and a standing reach just shy of 9′. Weighing in at 250 pounds, Morez has an NBA-ready body, but doesn’t sacrifice athleticism; he posted a strong max vertical of 39 inches, and ran the lane agility drill faster than all but one forward. Johnson’s hands are 10-inches wide, longer than Kawhi Leonard’s. On athletic profile alone, Morez is lottery-worthy.

It’s the production that seems to get lost in the shuffle. A prolific defender first and foremost, Morez flashed a lot as an above-the-rim finisher who is learning to expand his range. Johnson managed to draw lots of fouls while cashing 78% of his freebies. Making 36% of his midrange looks and 34% of his threes gives some hope that he can be a threat outside of the paint. We’ll get to the defensive impact in a bit, but here’s a basic glimpse at underclassmen who have matched Morez’s level of defensive production and scoring touch:

Pretty good company, if you ask me. Match this production with elite athleticism, and you’ve got a top prospect.

His uncanny timing as a rotational defender makes him a slam dunk for the Warriors. Yes, they need athletes who can grab boards and finish lobs, but if you can’t make consistent rotations, you will fail in Kerr’s defensive system. (i.e. Kuminga, Jonathan) Morez makes excellent reads as a defender and has a knack for high-pointing the ball for blocks, but doesn’t need to make the big play to have impact in a rotation.

Morez checks the athleticism box, the production box, and fits the current needs of the team along with the system. Mike Dunleavy Jr., make it happen.

Pass: Nate Ament (Wing/Forward, Tennessee)

This one terrifies me. Ament, a consensus five-star recruit and the No. 4 prospect in the nation (who flirted with 1.1), had a disappointing year in Knoxville. The highest recruit in Tennessee history, Ament was billed as a tall shooter who can put the ball on the deck to create his own shots and finish around the rim. Unfortunately, he didn’t quite hit the efficiencies evaluators wanted to see.

At 6’10” with solid all-around athleticism, Ament can get perimeter shots whenever he wants. The problem is that he failed to convert them, making 33% of his looks with the Vols. The volume wasn’t inspiring either at 7.9 threes per 100 possessions.

Mostly, he took midrange jumpers, which represented 61% of his two-points attempts; those went in at a 37% clip. Not exactly green-light territory in the NBA. Most concerning is the rim finishing: on non-dunk rim attempts, Ament shot 46.5%, a ghastly rate for a near seven-footer. He didn’t wow with dunks either, punching the ball home just 13 times.

Ament did draw plenty of free throws and convert them at a strong clip, boosting his efficiency overall; but, I don’t see it translating to the next level.

He’s too slight of frame at 210 pounds, doesn’t have short-area movement skills that impress, and is more reticent towards contact than you’d like. Referees don’t reward gangling guys who fall down going backwards; some forward momentum has to be involved.

Add in a meh assist/turnover ratio and a lack of defensive impact and you’ve got a player more theoretical than practical. A former top prospect who had no bankable skills as a play-finishing forward has no floor. I’ll leave you with this: here’s a list of all first-round picks with a rim finishing percentage under 55% and a three-point percentage under 35%:

Almost every successful NBA player on this list is a defense-first wing or a guard. Ament doesn’t fit any of these profiles. Hard pass on Patrick Baldwin III.

Draft: Ebuka Okorie (Guard, Stanford)

Talk about a late riser. Through the majority of the NCAA season, Ebuka Okorie projected as a late first to early second round prospect. Now that athletic testing and measurements are in, Okorie is flying up the board, possibly as high as No. 9 to the Mavericks. But if Morez Johnson is off the board and Okorie is sitting there, Mike Dunleavy Jr. should ensure that Okorie stays on the Peninsula.

Size is a big hurdle to overcome here. Just shy of 6’3″, Okorie is below the usual threshold you’d want to see for a lottery guard. In this class full of productive short guards, it’s not a huge knock, but it historically does not pan out. So why do I believe Okorie can hack it?

First things first, the arms impressed scouts at the NBA Combine. Okorie measured in with a 6’8″ wingspan, putting his physical dimensions squarely in the De’Anthony Melton zone. With huge 9″ hands, he effectively has oars for arms, a huge asset for him on both ends of the floor.. As Andre Iguodala once said, “these motherfuckers are crazy”.

Offensively, Okorie was a rim pressure monster. He took nearly eight shots per game at the rim, hitting a respectable 56% of them, along with eight dunks, an important benchmark for his size. Generating over 40% of your shots at the rim out in half-court sets is absurd, and if he pairs the finishing with a healthy diet of lay-offs to bigs/cutters and kickouts to shooters, he has legitimate primary scorer upside.

To reach that level of upside, Okorie needs counters, and he certainly has those. The pull-up three-point shooting was strong, and he’s comfortable making teams pay for going under on ball screens. The Stanford PG converted 42% of his midrange attempts, showing good floater touch and pull-up ability to counter drops. He needs to work on beating early help and outright doubles, but if he’s pressuring the defense enough to create those, it’s a tick in his favor.

Okorie has mastered ball handles, shows incredibly fast quick first step burst, has historic rates in turnover suppression and shots at the rim with indicators to potentially be a great 3pt shooter, and has one of the highest impact indicators via BPM of any prospect. When you consider his scalability show to help initiate the offense at the high school level to become lead option walking bucket who led an ACC with Cameron Boozer in it, you can envision where Okorie can complement Steph Curry on the court together and to stagger going forward.

Defensively, Okorie has the potential to be a monster at the point of attack. He used his long arms to his advantage, creating havoc on the perimeter. I was impressed with his motor given the usage he shouldered offensively for Stanford. Playing next to Steph Curry, he’ll surely have more energy to use on the defensive end of the floor. I do have some questions about his schematic fit in a funnel-based system, but I believe he has the court feel to understand how to angle his defensive assignments and play in rotation.

Okorie isn’t without question marks. A dual small-guard backcourt isn’t ideal in the NBA, but the post-Steph era has to be considered, and he has the upside to take the reins in future seasons. It’s a narrow path to navigate, making a pick for the short and long term, but the easiest answer is to draft a great talent and go from there. Okorie is that talent.

Pass: Bennett Stirtz (Guard, Iowa)

Look, it’s no knock on Stirtz that I’m passing here. He was extremely productive at Drake before transferring to Iowa, where he remained a high-level offensive engine. Stirtz shoots well on and off the ball, is productive on drives, and keeps the ball moving in ways that benefit his teammates.

Here’s the problem: I see no way that he is a productive starter as long as Steph Curry is around. With Wardell as the face of the franchise, that team is his offense, and he is the ball-dominant guard. Stirtz needs to fit some sort of billing as an off-ball guard to make things work in the interim.

Stirtz is the same size as Okorie, but his wingspan is shorter. For an off-ball guard, he’s too short, not heavy enough, and doesn’t test out as an elite athlete. His defensive numbers are fine, but he’s overly reliant on gambling for steals and not good enough at moving his feet or leveraging his strength, so he doesn’t project to be a plus at the point of attack. That may matter less in Kerr’s defensive system, but it still matters.

The shooting box is certainly ticked. Stirtz has shot at high volume and with impressive efficiency throughout his career, as a player who moves well off the ball in rare instances when he isn’t dribbling. Theoretically, the catch-and-drive game would play well, and he could flow in and out of split cuts while stampeding closeouts. But the lack of size is another knock on him in the Golden State system; 6’2″ and 186 pounds doesn’t play well screening off the ball.

For many other teams, Stirtz is a great value in this range. But Golden State is already too small, not athletic enough, and has its lead guard taken care of with Steph. The Warriors need just about everything, but they don’t need a high-volume scorer of a small guard who looks to be a negative defensively.

Draft: Yaxel Lendeborg (Forward/Big, Michigan)

Sometimes, the mocks get it right. Yaxel Lendeborg has been mocked to the Warriors at 11 quite often, and for good reason.

Plain and simple, the Warriors need guys who can play from Day 1. They also need positional size, rebounding production, overall athleticism, and legitimate play finishers to capitalize off Steph Curry’s gravity. Yaxel Lendeborg checks all of those boxes.

Offensively, I’m quite high on Yaxel. He is an excellent rim finisher, putting home 67% of his non-dunk rim attempts, and can get above the rim with ease. The ability to put the ball on the deck has grown over the years. Yaxel has knocked down long twos and threes on volume and with efficiency for his career. I’m also impressed with the playmaking, as he’s cut his turnover rate for three straight years in D1. It’s unreasonable to think of him as a future top option, but he has a malleable offensive profile that will translate to Steph-centric ball.

It’s the defense that pushes the upside case for me. Lendeborg has a knack for high-pointing the ball, but doesn’t chase blocks, using his 240-pound frame and length to affect shots. The rebounding was maligned at Michigan, but he dominated the glass at UAB and was understandably deferential on the glass to his 7’3″ frontcourt mate, Aday Mara. I see no reason why he can’t be a plus rebounder at the next level. He’s experienced and rotates well, and will be a great understudy for Draymond Green as a big versatile defender and handoff connective playmaker with two-way feel for the game.

Production isn’t the only benchmark that Lendeborg clears with ease. At 6’9″ with a 7’3″ wingspan, Lendeborg is a nimble fridge; he’s ready-made to play NBA power forward and could move up to the five in the right lineups. While the vertical didn’t wow evaluators, his agility score was 92nd percentile amongst forwards, a skill that weighs heavily when you have his build.

I understand why Lendeborg’s age is a concern, as he’ll be nearly 24 on draft night. But the counter to that is you’re getting years 24-28 on his first deal, and years 29-32 on his first extension if things break well. That’s a very important part of the calculus for a team that is light on productive players and good contracts. While I do prefer his teammate, Morez Johnson Jr., Yaxel checks all the boxes for this pick.

Pass: Aday Mara (Big, Michigan)

Mara is the only of the three Michigan bigs I wouldn’t draft to Golden State. It’s not about production; he was an absurd shot-blocker, great rebounder, sound rim finisher, and has surprisingly impressive passing chops for a 7’3″ big. It’s not athleticism, either; despite his mammoth size, he tested quite well in agility scores, and you can see his wiggle on film.

Here’s the problem: his size, and not in the way that you think. There are 12 former first-round picks who were 7’3″ or higher, and they averaged 420 games played for their career. Rik Smits, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, and Shawn Bradley are the only ones who cleared 800 career games. The two current players who meet that criteria—Victor Wembanyama and Zach Edey—aren’t exactly bastions of health. Wemby being available for 73.6% of his regular-season games isn’t that bad, but Edey has played only 46.9%. When you’re that tall and that built, gravity works awfully hard on you.

Mara isn’t without injuries in his career. He suffered an ankle injury in the midst of his NCAA tournament run at UCLA, has struggles with respiratory problems, and has struggled with conditioning. Even if he had a clean bill of health, I do not trust players that size to play starter’s minutes over an 82-game season, let alone the playoffs. If another team takes the risk and reaps the rewards, good for them.

2nd Round Draft: Tamin Lipsey (Guard, Iowa State)

If there’s one thing Mike Dunleavy Jr. has done exceptionally well in his tenure, it’s finding productive role players in the second round and beyond. Quinten Post and Will Richard have given them strong minutes as young role players, and Pat Spencer was excellent down the stretch this past season. Tamin Lipsey is an obvious role player bet there for the taking with the 54th pick.

An All-Defense player in the Big 12 for three seasons, Lipsey averaged 2+ steals per game for all four years at Iowa State. He’s exceptionally quick on his feet, a demon getting around screens, and has very fast hands. Lipsey is a ready-made point-of-attack defender who can fill a slap the floor and get after it role from Day 1.

Offensively, the upside is higher than you think. He’s a decent three-point shooter, finishes well around the rim, and has taken real strides in the midrange to become an impressive long-two creator. Iowa State plays a pro-style offense that has prepared him well for the next level. Perhaps most importantly for Golden State, he’s a plus passer with an assist/turnover ratio over 3.0 as a senior. He can make his teammates better without back-breaking mistakes.

Is Lipsey a huge upside bet? No. But players in his mold, like Jamal Shead and Davion Mitchell, have found ways to be contributors on playoff teams in recent years. Another ball-handler to organize the bench, who will improve their defensive infrastructure, is a huge win late in the second round.

The post Warriors 2026 Draft Guide appeared first on Swish Theory.

But what if he didn’t get any better? What if he just had the ball more? Let’s dig into the numbers to see what’s really going on.

Let’s start with his box score numbers. 28.8 Points per game, 5.3 assists, and 7.0 rebounds per game. Those seem like pretty monstrous box score numbers on their surface, and they are career highs for Brown. However, if we look at his efficiency, we can see it’s below league average. He’s posted a 98 True Shooting+ this season. (Two percent worse than league average) That’s not great for a primary option.

You might say, “Well, he’s taking more difficult shots with Tatum out.” We can look at his Shot Quality, and it is lower this season. But if we look at his Shot Making, we can see he’s basically performing at the same level he’s always been as a shot maker. (Shot making looks at actual vs expected Effective FG% based on shot quality)

What about his passing?

He is averaging a career high in assists. This is another case of just having the ball more. We can see that he’s always been a below-average passer relative to how often he gets to run the offense. The graph shows that he hasn’t improved as a passer, he just has more opportunities. 

“Well, he’s asked to do so much. He’s one of the top two-way players in the league, and an elite defender.” He did make that claim. If only we had a way to look into it with analytics. Oh, wait, we do.

Matchup Difficulty looks at how good the players are that you’re being asked to guard, and Guarded On-Ball% looks at how often you are guarding the player with the ball. We can see that Brown is guarding average players at a below-average rate.

His overall defensive impact metrics have been fine over his career, but nothing special. Here are his career D-LEBRON numbers.

By everything I can measure, Jaylen Brown has not improved this year. He just has the ball more. That he is in the MVP race is absurd. That is the power of the Boston Media machine. The same machine that convinced the public that Marcus Smart should win DPOY a few years ago. LEBRON and EPM WAR are metrics that estimate a player’s overall value over a season. They work by combining their impact per 100 possessions and their total minutes played. This produces their WAR, or Wins Above Replacement. I averaged the two stats together and compared Brown’s average WAR to the other MVP candidates.

SGA – 17.7 (1st)

Jokic – 15.73 (2nd)
Luka – 15.2 (3rd)

Wemby – 13.6 (4th)

Brown – 7.0 (26th)

Brown is not in the same stratosphere as the other MVP candidates. The point of the article isn’t to tell you Jaylen Brown is secretly a bad player, he’s not. But when we look into advanced analytics, he has not improved in a meaningful way. He’s the same player he’s been for years. A low-end All-Star who is very good, just not great. 

The post Did Jaylen Brown get better this year? appeared first on Swish Theory.

Cameron Boozer is simply one of the most versatile offensive hubs to ever play the sport of basketball.

Players Boozer’s size aren’t supposed to be this skilled – between his reliable handle, high-level playmaking vision, sublime shooting touch, and all-around scoring versatility, this 6’9″ 250lb bull gracefully drives through china shops without breaking a plate, consistently creating good looks for his team with quick-processing decision making, on-ball advantage creation, and off-ball play-finishing gravity stretching from downtown to the rim.

Fresh off an All-Time great one-and-done Duke season, Boozer has proven elite traits since his development path from Columbus High School that could add up to a sum-of-its-parts offensive engine at the NBA level:

• Outlier Outlet Passing
• Efficient Scoring Versatility
• Connective Hub Playmaking
• Special Rebounding Instincts
• Knockdown Perimeter Shooting
• Quick Processing Two-Way Feel

Now that March Madness ended in an exciting-before-disappointing run, there’s finally a crack in the Boozer Twins’ perfect armor.

Evaluators can still write a Christmas Carole with the list of accolades that the Boozer twins (Cameron, Cayden) have accomplished on their run to this point, two of the biggest winners to ever play the sport:

4 Florida State Titles
3 Nike EYBL Peach Jam Championships
2 Team USA Gold Medals
1 High School Natty

and the ACC champion regular season + tournament trophies.

After finishing the season, Cameron Boozer adds AP Player of the Year to that resume while becoming the first player in NCAA history to win NABC Freshman of the Year, Big Man of the Year, and Player of the Year.

Cameron Boozer is the clear best bet #1 pick in the 2026 NBA Draft class

Boozer is the clear top prospect in an all-time draft class not due to some immeasurable talent or high-flying bounce, but due to his consistent team-first feel and efficient scoring versatility in every basketball situation he finds himself in on the court.

Carlos Boozer calls his son, Cameron Boozer, a “modern-day version” of Tim Duncan, via Marc Spears:

“You look at what Tim Duncan did. I’m not comparing Cameron to Tim Duncan, but he was another guy that wasn’t [athletically] a Kevin Garnett or a Tracy McGrady or a Kobe Bryant or Shaquille O’Neal. But you know what he did? He won five championships in that era [against] those players — the Kobes and the Shaqs, because of his IQ, because of his skill set, and because his team would follow him… That is who Cameron is. He’s a modern-day version of that… So. if you want to win, you pick Cameron.” – Carlos Boozer

One popular comp for Boozer has been Kevin Love, and for good reason; while the mobility of these two players and play-styles on the ball are quite different, there are a handful of outlier elite attributes in outlet passing, rebounding, three-point shooting, post-up prowess and an impressively high BPM impact rating that make the stretch-four prospect comparisons easy to make. Love was an even better rebounder in college than Cam, but was slightly less efficient as a scorer and was 4 percentage points worse as a 3pt shooter. One big difference, though, is Boozer’s playmaking talent being on another level (25% AST/14% TOV%) compared to Love’s score-first style (14% AST%/15% TOV%)

Love was a big time prospect in his own right as a next-level scorer, shooter, rebounder, play-finisher and all-time outlet passer. Boozer’s ability to do those things similarly well while combining that scoring gravity with his handle, vision, and two-way feel takes his game to another level, allowing him to make quick decisions, create advantages for teammates and generate good shots for his team consistently, is what takes his potential superstardom to an even higher level of a scoring creator than Love.
One huge skill separating these two prospects here is Boozer’s handle, refined enough to help him self-create so many of these opportunities without needing a teammate to create the advantage first, which is uncommon for a big man. That handle, with the added team-focused playmaking, creates a floor-stretching downhill scoring creator with offensive engine gravity.

Another popular comparison brings up aesthetic similarities to the Magic’s Paolo Banchero and peak Pistons Blake Griffin in things like role malleability, scoring versatility, short-roll and postup playmaking, downhill play-finishing, and free-throw drawing as a powerful dunking 6’9”+ 250lb tank who can operate both ends of a pick-and-roll. As far as the hype machine bringing up names like Tim Duncan and Nikola Jokic, it’s for glimpses of similarities in fundamental footwork, strong screening, team-first connective play, and general understanding of the game as old-school offensive hubs, like Duncan sleepwalking to 20-10-3-3 statlines and Jokic splashing otherworldly tough shots and diming unthinkable passes from nearly any spot on the floor.

None of these are one-to-one comps; just all-time great prospects and players with comparable roles, playstyles, and archetypes who Boozer can build off to impact the game in similar ways to the stars who walked before him, like an artist mastering their craft by studying the classic works of old before mixing up what they learned into something new.

Any franchise painting on an empty canvas should give Boozer the paintbrush and get out of the way.


The Film

Just to highlight Boozer’s position and role malleability, let’s look at some Duke tape to see how an NBA team can utilize him in a variety of Pick-and-Roll situations, without even getting to the one-on-one creation card he can pull out of his sleeve.

Boozer running pick-and-rolls on the ball shows his ability to attack mismatches with drives and find teammates for good looks.

Boozer spaces the floor from deep in Pick-and-Pops, utilizing his shooting gravity to knock down C&S threes and attack closeouts with pump-fakes and driving touch finishes, creating a lethal shooting threat compared to the average screening roll-man.

Boozer’s finesse in the paint from a variety of angles and force at the rim when rolling hard offers a versatile play-finisher compared to the average screening roll-man, not to mention his ability to playmake out of the short-roll.

The Data
(as of 03.19.26)

Averaging 23 PPG – 10 REB – 4 AST / 2 TOV – 1.5 STL, Boozer seems to fill up the box score consistently whether you think he’s having a good game or not. In his time at Duke, he racked up 68 Stocks (BLK + STL) to 57 fouls, a good indicator for defensive instincts forcing turnovers without fouling.

Recorded 2 games with 15 REB, 2 games with 14 REB, 5 games with 13 REB, another 5 games with 12 REB; Boozer knows a thing or two about crashing the glass in case of emergency.

His best scoring outings were as follows: vs. Arkansas scoring 35 PTS on 1.4 PPP, vs. Indiana State with 35 PTS on 1.6 PPP, vs. Wake Forest with 32 PTS on 1.4 PPP, vs. Stanford with 30 PTS on 1.4 PPP, and vs. Florida with 29 PTS on 1.1 PPP.

Seemingly endless stat indicators hint at Boozers’ scoring versatility, shooting touch, rebounding instincts, and two-way feel being positives that will translate to winning at any level.

Synergy Playtypes:

Excellent or very good all-around scorer in most situations:

Excellent, Versatile Scoring Profile:

Boozer quite literally scored 1.0-1.5 PPP in every playtype other than off screens and handoffs, thriving in Post Ups (1.1 PPP), Spot Ups (1.3), Transition (1.4), ISO (1.0), Put Backs (1.4), and Cuts (1.5).

For comparison, AJ Dybantsa scored 0.88 PPP in ISO, in the 58th percentile, and 1.0 on Spot Ups, the 64th percentile, and 0.77 PPP as P&R Roll-Man, 14th percentile. Dybantsa thrived as P&R Ball-Handler, Transition, Post Ups, and Put Backs, but still scored less efficiently than Boozer in all those playtypes, except for his Put Back Rate.

Just to further highlight his scoring versatility, Boozer scored 1.3 PPP as the Roll-Man in P&R on 60 poss, and scored over 1.0 PPP on 63 poss as the P&R Ball-Handler. Breaking that up into pops vs rolls: 31 times he pick-and-popped for 1.3 PPP; 25 times he pick-and-rolled for 1.4 PPP; 4 times he slipped the pick for 1.5 PPP.

Are you picking up on the absurdly efficient scoring in nearly every playtype in nearly every situation on and off the ball?

Other than handoffs, off screen, and less scripted plays that don’t involve his patented putbacks, he’s rated in Top-20 percentile in all 8 other playtypes recorded by Synergy.

Offensive Engine Indicators – Team Shot Creation via Boozer’s Scoring + Playmaking in ISO, Postup, P&R Ball-Handler

Efficient shot creation including passes shows the decision making and execution ability of a primary ball-handler, which could be one of the sports’ few measures reflecting a player’s feel for the game.

Boozer scored 1.0 PPP on Drives for Duke; he preferred to drive left, averaging 1.1 PPP on 67 left-side drives compared to 0.9 PPP on right-side drives.

When including passes as a pick-and-roll ball-handler, Boozer’s shot creation for his team becomes even more efficient at 1.08 PPP on 128 possessions, staying at 1.1 PPP on another 72 possessions where the defense “commits” to him as a P&R ball-handler.

Compared to Dybantsa, AJ created 0.93 PPP on 356 possessions as P&R Ball-Handler including passes, a roughly 0.15 PPP worse than Boozer’s 1.08 PPP.

Cam’s ISO PPP, including passes to teammates, rises slightly above 1.0 in efficiency; Dybantsa’s rises to 0.9 PPP.

Boozer encourages defenses to double him in the post; when including passes on postups, Boozer creates 1.1 PPP on 241 poss (84th percentile); he creates just under 1.0 PPP on 121 postups where defense “commits”, and he creates 1.1 PPP on 91 postups where defense sends a hard “double” (85th).

Dybantsa does well out of the post, creating 1.2 PPP on 128 possessions for his team, a slightly better mark than Boozer on half the volume.

Boozer’s scoring creation indicators are so promising, he could take being a versatile efficient offensive hub to a full blown ‘offensive engine’ level for a franchise if his skillset is maximized for its quick processing efficient shot creation.

All in all, these efficiencies across every play type as both a scorer and team-first shot creator show how malleable Boozer’s game can be at any level, thanks to his efficient shooting versatility and high-feel decision-making.

Here’s one look at Boozer’s processing from Swish Theory’s Ben Pfeifer, who calls Boozer, “the best post skip passing prospect he’s ever scouted”:

Shooting Touch Indicators

42% C&S 3P% on 91 3PA
41% Pull-Up 3P% on 34 3PA
65% eFG% on 296 Shots At The Rim
61% eFG% on 255 Layups
94% eFG% on 35 Dunks
(9/12 on Hooks)

Overall Scoring & Creation

1.18 PPP
67% TS%
62% eFG%
1.7 AST/TO (133 AST)
26% AST% / 12% TOV%
62% 2P% on 338 2PA
42% 3P% on 125 3PA
78% FT% on 244 FTA

All-Time NCAA & ACC Ranks

1st in NCAA in BPM, Offensive BPM, Win Shares, Win Shares Per 40, Def Win Shares, Off Win Shares, and PER
1st in ACC in PTS | 2nd in NCAA in PTS
2nd in ACC in PPG | 9th in NCAA in PPG
1st in ACC in REB | 7th in NCAA in REB
1st in ACC in RPG | 13th in NCAA in RPG
2nd in ACC in Offensive RPG | 19th in NCAA in Offensive RPG
1st in ACC in Defensive RPG | 8th in NCAA in Defensive RPG
8th in ACC in AST
11th in ACC in AST
9th in ACC in STL
13th in ACC in STL / GM
4th in ACC in FG%
18th in ACC in FT%
12th in ACC in 2P%
3rd in ACC in eFG%
3rd in ACC in TS%
9th in ACC in AST%

BPM History

2nd-highest BPM ever (+20), up there with fellow Duke Blue Devil Zion Williamson for the most impactful collegiate season by impact rating.

Boozer joins Zach Edey and Steph Curry (2x) as the only members of the 30 USG% / 15+ BPM Club, via Chip Williams.

Cerebro Ratings & NCAA Data Viz

Cerebro Stat Glossary:
C-RAM (Overall Impact) | PSP (Scoring) | 3PE (3PT Shooting) | FGS (Playmaking) | ATR (Rebounding/Blocks) | DSI (Steals/Fouls)

What stands out most about Boozer compared to his peers in the conversation for the #1 pick is that Boozer combines the sum of his parts to project as a reliable half-court hub for an offense to consistently create good looks every night out for the next decade. Boozer’s ball skills, footwork, and mix of efficient scoring versatility, efficient team shot creation, playmaking execution, and team-first decision-making create a walking advantage creator who bends defenses and generates efficient points at will.

Freshman Boozer rated higher that Dybantsa and Peterson overall and in almost every aspect of the game that Cerebro tracks, other than Peterson’s lights-out 3pt shooting metric.

Boozer’s cumulative career ratings this far in all games recorded by Cerebro are elite as a scorer, rebounder, and defender, while ranking highest in every category except for being one point shy of Peterson’s defense and ranking a close 3rd in 3pt shooting. This highlights Cam’s elite traits and scoring efficiency, making winning plays like rebounding and playmaking, the ability to spread the floor from deep, and a special feel for touch passes and turnover-forcing defense, and shows how incredible his now-elite 3pt shooting development has come from his days at the grassroots level.

Individual perimeter defense and lack of quick first step burst could limit Boozer exploding past anyone or shutting down anyone on the perimeter, like most power forwards he’s more of an ultimate connective hub, but his instincts will help him force steals, his versatility will help him switch 3-5 to some degree, and he is effective in one-on-one offense in other ways by using his footwork, awareness, and skill to score and create advantages.

Efficient Shooting Line, High Usage, Low Turnovers

There is only one freshman since 2008 to hit Boozer’s marks in shooting percentages and shooting volume on twos, threes, and free throws at his usage.

According to barttorvik, Boozer is the only NCAA Freshman in their database with over 30% USG% who shot 61-39-78 on 10 2PA — 3 3PA — 7 FTA. For comparison, Dybantsa shot 57-33-77 on 13 2PA –– 4 3PA –– 9 FTA.

The chart below visualizes NCAA freshmen who meet a handful of stats attempting to show scoring efficiency and high-feel decision making, with the x-axis showing volume of shots at the rim horizontally, and turnover percentage vertically on y-axis.

Boozer has the most shots at the rim of all these prospects as a freshmen, and the 2nd-best turnover percentage while doing it, lagging behind one of the draft class’s other best decision-makers, Stanford Ebuka Okorie.

← Rewind to 2023: Scouting The Montverde Sunshine Classic


#12 Cam Boozer, 6’10” Forward, Columbus

A strong-shouldered forward with feathery shooting touch like his NBA All-Star dad, the 6’9″ Cam Boozer quickly become a household name in draft circles as a Top-3 2026 prospect, with this Montverde-Columbus marquee matchup featuring another potential Top-3 prospect (in 2025), Cooper Flagg, just to name two of many exciting prospects in this contest.

Cam Boozer and Donavan Freeman rate strongly here as both scorers and creators, in a similar range of output this weekend as Cooper Flagg and guards Rob Wright and Darius Acuff.

vs. Montverde
20 PTS
8 REB
5 AST / 8 TO
4 STL + 1 BLK
6/13 FG & 7/10 FT
(30 MIN)

A powerful yet graceful dancing bear 6’9″ forward who rocks rims on rolls through the paint, shows soft touch on the jump shot, looks ahead for outlet passes, and glides through defenses on off-ball cuts, Cam sure plays like a Boozer.

In the Montverde matchup, Boozer came out with more intensity in the second half, focusing on powering through people, showing sound handles on the ball, lookahead vision as a playmaker, and leaving huge impact as a rim-finishing play-finisher, even blocking a Flagg driving layup in help defense before finding his brother Cayden on the break off the turnover.

His outlet passes to jumpstart fast breaks were plentiful, even featuring a highlight coast-to-coast live-dribble behind-the-back dribble corner kick 3pt assist!

Boozer flashed all the developable dribble-pass-shoot ball-skills with strong finishing power and good off ball movement timing. This powerful 6’10” hammer who nails deep range jumpers projects to be an offensive force at the highest levels, excelling in similar areas to his NBA All-Star dad, while showing natural scoring creator tendencies for team-first shot creation.

Cam posted the 6th-highest overall impact rating in the event with 8.9 C-RAM, practically tying Cooper’s overall rating. Boozer was more effective as a scorer with a 79/100 PSP rating in the matchup, slightly more impactful defensively with an 87/100 DSI, while mostly matching Flagg in Floor General Skills and At The Rim effectiveness (75 FGS and 70 ATR)

Cam Boozer and Cooper Flagg sit atop future NBA Draft big boards for a reason; big wing/forward plus-defenders who can be relied on as halfcourt offensive creators, connectors, and play-finishers tend to be impactful winning basketball players.

The Good
Scoring at all three levels on and off the ball
Pick-and-pop, catch-and-shoot, relocation threes
Vertical gravity rim-running and well-timed paint-cutting
Drawing fouls with brute strength, sound footwork, solid handle
Clear vision, passing ability, grab-and-go playmaking chops looking ahead on fast breaks
Filling out the box score on both ends like a Shawn Marion or Aaron Gordon multi-faceted turnover-forcing play-finisher

The Bad
Losing control. Whether it be his own strength, the dribble, body and ball control at times – focused effort on spatial awareness, gaining the proprioception feeling of understanding one’s own body movements in space, could work wonders
First half lacked energy and focus compared to second half, but played opponent even from that point in a tough matchup

In football, a dancing bear tends to be a nickname for powerful defensive ends wh are surprisingly agile; large in their frame, yet quick on their feet.

Boozer is the strong, yet graceful dancing bear that any franchise dreams of building around.

A true modern day do-it-all power forward bending the floor on and off the ball, pummeling his way through defenders throwing elbows and shoulder swings, moving skinny through gaps with fundamental footwork fundamentals, finishing below the rim with an endless array of moves, rebounding everything in sight, forcing steals and processing team-first decisions from high to low.

Cameron Boozer remains the clear #1 2026 NBA Draft Pick for me through years of scouting due to him being one of the most impactful, efficient, effective, versatile shot-creating prospects to ever play the sport.

If anyone can be the tentpole that holds up an entire city in the circus that is the NBA, it’s the guy who always plays, always plays hard, always plays smart, always makes team-first decisions, and always generates good shots for his team.

While the basketball world eats up dunks, middy pull-ups, and fadeaways, one lucky team might just wind up landing one of the biggest winners the sport has ever seen, if only they buy low on the Dancing Bear Market.

The post Cameron Boozer, Duke’s Generational Dancing Bear appeared first on Swish Theory.

“Anyone who thinks you can have infinite growth in a finite environment is either a madman or an economist.”

Stubbornly insisting on a single approach can lead to blind alleys. Sometimes, looking at things from a different angle and changing perspectives can reveal unexpected details and help untangle contorted situations.

While I do not have a background in the more technical aspects of basketball, I compensate by putting to good use my expertise in other fields to better understand what I am watching. The pinnacle of interdisciplinary approaches, in my mind, is Evan Zaucha’s article, “The Art and Science of ‘Feel’ in Basketball”. Evan brings his neuroscience background to the forefront of his analysis to describe what the term ‘feel’ actually means in basketball terms.

Similarly, I intend to go beyond the traditional borders of basketball analysis, mapping my knowledge of ecology onto the basketball court.

Introducing the concept of density-dependent factors

A density-dependent factor is defined as “any force that affects the size of a population of living things in response to the density of the population.”

In nature, there are positive density-dependent processes, like diseases that would spread faster among individuals who live in close proximity, and there are negative density-dependent processes. In our case, we’ll take into account mostly the latter processes.

For example, the growth rate of mammal populations is generally influenced (negatively) by the density of the individuals.

Let’s take a look at how a deer population evolves. As population density increases, the amount of available food in the sample area will decline. As food declines, the body condition of individuals worsens. The birth rate is directly proportional to the animals’ body condition: when body condition is poor, the birth rate is low.

Ultimately, high density leads to scarce food supply and poor body condition, which in turn leads to a declining growth rate of the population. You can see already where this is headed.

Another variable that affects the process is the quality of the habitat, which can influence the rate at which growth declines. Habitats rich in resources can sustain higher individual densities for longer and slow the decline in growth rate; poor habitats will have declining growth rates.

(Credits @www.msudeer.msstate.edu)

This kind of process works for plants as well: just think about a very dense group of seedlings competing for the solar light.

NBA Ecosystem

An ecosystem can be broadly defined as a community of living organisms that interact with each other and their non-living environment. While I understand it doesn’t reflect what we commonly consider an ecosystem, the NBA itself can fall within this (broad, as I said) definition.

I’ve been meditating for years on the concept of the “NBA Ecosystem”: an interconnected set of biotic and abiotic components where we can identify rules and processes that we find every day in a coral reef or a boreal forest, for example. A reality that can be studied and analyzed through an ecological lens, alongside the traditional ways we analyze sports.

If we consider the entire National Basketball Association as a complex ecosystem, every team can represent a distinct habitat with its resources, population, and relative interactions. In this context of team-habitats within the NBA ecosystem, we can adopt an ecological approach to roster building, not focusing on the pieces themselves, but analyzing them in their connections with other biotic and abiotic components.

Density-dependent Growth and roster building

NBA teams can be assessed as peculiar habitats, and players as their populations, so we can try to apply the same models we generally use in ecological studies. I often think about similar ecological concepts when looking up this or that NBA roster or reading about a certain signing. And although they were modeled for a completely different field, I do think keeping in mind how these mechanisms work can help us understand certain NBA situations and players’ outcomes.

Density-dependent processes can be a useful tool for seeing rosters from a different angle, while adapting the notions we already have. First of all, rosters can have a max of 15 regular players plus three two-way contracts; the sheer number can’t be higher or lower, besides some rare exceptions. Then, what can be considered the “density”? It depends on the number of players occupying the same niche within the team dynamics. A 10-year vet and a rookie clearly don’t occupy the same niche nor have the same role with the team. In these years of rumination on the topic, I found density-dependent growth particularly fitting for the “population” of rookies and younger players who still need to develop their game.

While in the ecological studies, “growth” represents how the number of individuals in the sample area changes (generally expressed with a rate) in a roster where the number of individuals is pretty much fixed It takes on a more abstract meaning, representing the improvements of a player’s basketball ability.

The richness of resources in the context of a team/habitat is more labile from our point of view. It would take into account the number of minutes available, the quality and quantity of the staff. Three young players competing for minutes in a rebuilding team is a starkly different situation than three players competing for a similar share of minutes on a contending team with a set rotation consistently aiming for the best possible result.

This is an interesting excerpt of an article written by Tom Orsborn for the San Antonio Express-News about Spurs’ increased attention for film studies. The case was unusual, but it gives us a nice hint about something that otherwise would usually be inaccessible: even the potential hours available to study the tape can become resources young players are “competing” for.

In summary, if we consider it a functional parallel, an NBA team represents the habitat of the young players’ population, whose basketball skills’ evolutionary trajectory depends on the number of its individuals and the richness of opportunities, staff, and facilities. A fruitful habitat for maximizing these kinds of developmental resources is not guaranteed.

Brooklyn Nets, a concerning habitat?

The opening quote of this article could also replace “an economist” with “a Brooklyn Nets fan” (except for Lucas Kaplan and other rational Nets fans). The Nets represent a great example of what I’m trying to convey, and their moves during the last offseason were the spark that made me feel the urge to write about this topic.

The Nets’ roster at the beginning of the season (via spotrac.com)

With five rookies and a handful of other players who still need development competing for the same resources, the Brooklyn Nets could soon find themselves with a “declining growth rate” caused by the density within their habitat.

Looking up the Brooklyn Nets’ current per-game assists leaders represents a mystical experience: an apparent balance that hides a reality of shortcomings. All of them occupy a similar niche; all of them compete for playtime and reps; all of them will consume coaching staff resources. Considering also the fact that this season’s rookies are looking like players who need a consistent development path to impact, it is safe to assume not all of them will succeed and probably won’t have an ideal trajectory.

To me, the bigger issue is accumulating five first-round picks in a single draft: it implicitly punts the value of these picks as they are all competing for the same scant playing time/resources. Even more concerning is that all five of the selected players are fairly low-floor. A few of them will likely bust pretty hard. – The Case for Egor Demin by Avinash Chauhan

As Avi demonstrates, the concept of “overpopulation” that can limit the development of young players is something that already stuck in the back of our heads through empirical research and observations. The parallel with the density-dependent factors offers a more standardized explanation of the dynamic.

The byproduct of this messy ecological situation is evident. The team tried to find a balance, assigning players like Ben Saraf and Nolan Traore to the Long Island Nets, where they had to sail the insidious waters of the G League. Meanwhile, Egor Dëmin has his minutes and chances, but his season has been characterized by highs and lows (although it looks like he’s figuring out some things lately).

The release of Cam Thomas at the last trade deadline can be considered a symptom of the process. In a vacuum, it represents a potential waste of assets for the team, but on the other hand, it frees up resources.

Historic examples

The past offers us plenty of examples of the processes we’re examining if we look closely enough. Most rebuilding teams go through phases of overpopulation that are probably a natural consequence of trying to have and take as many draft chances as possible. The San Antonio Spurs during their 2022-2025 rebuild represent a great example I particularly care about.

The 2023-24 Spurs roster

Players like Dominick Barlow, Sidy Cissoko, Sandro Mamukelaishvili and even Blake Wesley or Jamaree Bouyea (who, to be fair, bounced around quite a bit before finally finding his niche this season) didn’t shine or had the chance to shine in this extremely young, extremely dense roster. And all of them are finding more success elsewhere.

Cissoko had some clearly likeable qualities as a prospect, but didn’t improve much from rookie to sophomore season, and the Spurs couldn’t find space in 2024-25 when they were already trying to put together wins. In this particular situation, the process was probably sped up by how quickly the team found their cornerstone (and it likely also applies for the Thunder at the time). When a team just drafted a young phenomenon and owns several future draft picks, the clock starts ticking early for those who are on the margins of the roster.

In a similar quickly developing, hyper-competitive environment, it becomes less likely for two-way players like Barlow and Bouyea to break into the rotation. Although there were probably some signs of Dom Barlow’s trajectory, especially considering how good he was at the G League level at a young age.

In the grand scheme of things, most of this stuff becomes irrelevant when your team gets the 7’4 lottery prize, but winning on the margins gives longer windows of opportunity. Look at it the other way around: how irrelevant was it for the Philadelphia 76ers finding their current starting power forward as a result of this process (Sixers? Process? Unintended pun)?

Acknowledging this process, it becomes easier to recognize buy-low, low-risk/high-reward occasions for teams disposing of plenty of resources. Besides the aforementioned Dom Barlow opportunity, Moussa Diabate going from an end-of-the-bench piece for a competitive team to growing into a high-level rotation piece for the Hornets is a notable example. In these cases, pre-draft evaluations and the G League sample are particularly relevant to identify the ideal candidates.

Another player that could become the most recent, valid argument in favor of this thesis is Ousmane Dieng. Since he left Oklahoma City, the French forward is showing things he didn’t have the chance to display consistently in the depth of the best team in the league.

The Houston Rockets from a few seasons ago are a slightly different but no less interesting case-study: players like Usman Garuba and Josh Christopher got devoured by the rebuild meat-grinder. Cam Whitmore is enduring a similar fate, though there seems to be some more attitudinal stuff going on with him. Could his issues be fixed by devoting more off-the-court attention to these issues in a less developmentally-dense environment?

It is obviously hard for us, as outside observers, to distinguish between those who simply weren’t good enough and who didn’t get enough chances to improve and have a better developmental trajectory in this case. However, those constitute interesting data points anyway.

Natural selection and density dependence

If you endured the reading of this piece to this point and followed NBA basketball in the last few years, you probably realize one of the weaknesses of this theory (or ramblings?).

Recent NBA history shows us that relying on sheer “natural selection” putting prospects in a highly competitive environment represents a functional strategy of long-term team building. Stockpiling as many prospects as possible and just find who is able to figure things out in the league seems to work decently enough.

Just think about the reigning NBA champions, the Oklahoma City Thunder.

Aleksej Pokusevski, Theo Maledon, Darius Bazley, and many others. Many players indeed busted, and many of their assets ended up in the meat grinder, but the selective pressure also allowed them to identify many pieces that are currently part of the clear-cut best team in the league.

However, the density-dependent processes remain important because not every team starts from the same foundations, with the same number of draft opportunities or resources. “Natural selection” operates within the density-dependent processes, and acknowledging them and how they work can help maximize the outcomes.

Wrapping it up

In high school, I studied Latin for 5 years, even though I attended a scientific high school. Many criticize its teaching because it’s a dead language and doesn’t have much value outside the academic world. However, Latin isn’t taught for its utility; it’s taught as a mental exercise to stimulate the identification of connections and instill a certain “forma mentis” in students.

I realized this article represents something similar. It doesn’t presume to solve team-building issues by adopting just a couple of ecological models. But this article humbly wanted to be a useful mental exercise, something that can stimulate the research of patterns and a transverse, interdisciplinary approach in a field that sometimes is a bit too vertical, fossilized in its knowledge.

The post Density-dependent Growth – an interdisciplinary look at roster building appeared first on Swish Theory.

If this issue were yet another symptom of our decaying online discourse, then there’d be no use in me writing this article or you reading this article. However, this same uncertainty around determining and quantifying player impact still persists at the highest levels of our sport, and it’s the reason why institutions, armed with premium datasets and hordes of full-time scouts, still get it wrong. Every year, draft boards fracture, bad contracts are given out like candy, and team-building philosophies collapse under any sort of playoff inspection.

Take the years-long debate over who should be the number one pick in this year’s upcoming NBA Draft out of Cameron Boozer, AJ Dybantsa, and Darryn Peterson. For some, Cameron Boozer is the drop-dead choice. A player who represents the Platonic ideal of prospect productivity, currently in the midst of one of the greatest freshman seasons of all time. At the same time, however, you have anonymous NBA scouts questioning whether he’s even a franchise cornerstone at the levels of his contemporaries.

What these issues and debates reveal is not confusion of talent or disagreement over players, but a deeper and more intrinsic struggle over what exactly player impact is, and how it should be determined. To me, at least, the issue stems from how we treat player impact. As if it were a single, unified concept that can be ranked from good to bad. So, before we ask the question of ‘who’s better than who’ or ‘who deserves what contract’, we need to first define: what exactly is player impact?

The Two Degrees of Impact

The framework I will try to explain in this article stems from a simple but too often overlooked truth about basketball, which is that not every action carries the same value. And over the course of a 48-minute game, hundreds and hundreds of actions will occur with varying levels of influence.

This is because basketball (and many other team sports) is, at its core, a stochastic sport. This means outcomes emerge from a web of probabilistic events rather than deterministic sequences, and small variations compound across possessions. As a result, actions cannot be treated as equal simply because they occur within the same possession or box score.

Every action that takes place on a basketball court is a probabilistic bet that seeks to tilt the game-state towards one direction; however, most mainstream analysis seeks to collapse all of these actions into narrow sets of outputs: points, rebounds, assists, etc. And in doing so we end up over/under valuing certain player archetypes that better suit our own personal biases.

Cumulative Impact

Following on from that jargon, we can now get into the weeds of the framework, and the first idea I need to introduce is that there are two levels of impact that a player can exert on a game, with the first being what I currently refer to as cumulative impact. Cumulative impact is the influence a player exerts on a game through actions whose value emerges from repetition and continuity. Cumulative players generate and preserve extra possessions, and while these actions do not produce high-value outcomes in isolation, they shape the conditions in which future possessions occur. Rather than deciding outcomes outright, these actions reduce the team’s reliance on low-probability solutions.

Basketball behaviours that indicate a player is cumulative, and some statistical indicators:

ability to extend and complete advantages

• assist rate 
• potential assists
• secondary assists 

ability to generate extra possessions

• offensive rebound rate
• steal rate
• offensive fouls drawn
• deflections

ability to preserve possession integrity

• turnovers per game 
• turnover percentage
• assist to turnover ratio

ability to impact possessions without direct ball involvement

• gravity rate
• opponent rim attempt frequency
• opponent fg% at rim
• defensive on/off

However, while cumulative impact explains how teams build and sustain momentum, it doesn’t explain how they convert that control into outcomes. You can control the chessboard for hours, accumulate pieces, dictate the pace of play, but at the end of the day, the game is still decided by checkmate.

Decisive Impact

This brings us to the second level of player impact, which is what I’m calling decisive impact. Decisive impact is the influence a player exerts on a game through high-difficulty and high-leverage actions that directly resolve possessions and sharply alter the game state. Where cumulative impact shapes the flow of a game, decisive impact collapses that flow into results. These moments disproportionately affect win probability and rely more on individual execution under pressure.

Here are some behaviours that indicate a player is decisive, and some usual statistical indicators:

ability to independently create/prevent advantages:

• pts/75
• ts added per 100
• shot usage
• FTA per 100
• block rate

ability to execute when time, space or structure is constrained:

• grenade percent
• grenade efg
• isolation efficiency
• clutch efficiency
• contested shot efficiency
• STOP%
• rSTOP%

The Four Quadrants of Player Impact

I’ve always been uncomfortable with binary thinking, and it’s probably why, growing up in school, I was always drawn more towards the humanities than STEM subjects. To me, very few meaningful things in life fit neatly into two categories, and player impact is no different.

In reality, we know that players vary in just how much cumulative or decisive impact they exert on games and that these dimensions are independent of each other. It’s why a player can be highly cumulative without being highly decisive, and why a player can be highly decisive without being highly cumulative.

Conceptually, I think this framework is best visualised as a fluid, four-quadrant model:

Low-Impact Players

These are the players whose presence does little to meaningfully alter either the structure or outcome of games. They neither accumulate influence through their repeated activity on the court, nor do they have the capability to resolve high-leverage possessions. This does not mean they lack basketball skill, but rather that their actions do not scale in either volume or difficulty. YOU SHOULD AVOID DEDICATING EXTERNAL RESOURCES TO THESE PLAYERS AT ALL COSTS.

Structural Players

Players in this quadrant are your textbook floor-raisers. The RAPM darlings. Rather than decide games outright, they shape how games are played through influencing a large volume of possessions. Their impact is rarely spectacular in isolation, but compounds over time as they increase the frequency of point-scoring opportunities. YOU SHOULD DEDICATE RESOURCES TO THESE PLAYERS PROVIDED YOU HAVE THE REQUIRED EVENT PLAYERS TO CAPITALISE ON THEIR IMPACT.

Event Players

Players in this quadrant are your archetypal ceiling raisers. They are those players whose value lies in their proficiency in high-difficulty situations. The Ball Don’t Stop alumni, if you will. And while their impact might not be felt continuously over a game, it will no doubt manifest itself in those high-leverage moments where only the strong survive. YOU SHOULD DEDICATE RESOURCES TO THESE PLAYERS PROVIDED YOU HAVE THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL PLAYERS TO PROVIDE THEM AMPLE CHANCES FOR IMPACT.

Dual-Impact Players

This is the quadrant occupied by the true outliers of the sport, and those special hoopers who had/have the ability to both: increase the amount of and resolve their team’s scoring possessions. There is rarely a moment in a game where they are not either directly or indirectly involved in a possession. YOU SHOULD DEDICATE THE MAJORITY OF YOUR RESOURCES TOWARDS TRYING TO ATTAIN THESE PLAYERS.

Why the Most Valuable Players Tend to be Dual-Impact

An important, and perhaps the most important clarification that needs to be made before going further, is that within the same quadrant/archetype, players can vary enormously in quality. Not all structural players are equally valuable, nor are all event players, and this framework, when applied lazily, can flatten those distinctions. To me, what explains these gaps in quality are not the archetype itself, but the constraints under which players operate. Inherent physical and biomechanical limitations, as well as the external team environment, shape the range of total actions a player can perceive as viable. And while you can adapt your game around these constraints to become an effective player, these constraints will always exist and limit your ceiling.

A useful way of conceptualising this is through Plato’s Theory of the Forms. In Plato’s theory, the physical world contains imperfect instantiations of ideal Forms, abstract, complete expressions of concepts like justice or beauty. A drawn circle may resemble the Form of a circle, but it will never fully realise its perfection. Dual-Impact players represent the ideal Form of player impact: the fullest and most complete expression of game influence, where the physical capacity, technical skills, and cognitive processing all align. Structural and event players are merely imperfect (but still valuable) instantiations of that form, approximating along one or two of those dimensions, but not all. And it is this incompleteness that introduces fragility into their impact when conditions change.

Beyond any specific technical or physical traits, what truly separates dual-impact players from the rest of the field begins in the mind. At the highest levels of the sport, where technical skill-sets overlap and physical margins narrow, what separates players is not simply what actions they can execute or how they execute, but when and why they execute. Dual-impact players show a heightened sensitivity to the spatiotemporal structure of the game and understand that possessions are not isolated events, but linked sequences whose value compounds across time. This cognitive elasticity is what allows them to constantly shift their thinking from an individual to a team level, and the emergent result of this advantage is that their individual impact is less sensitive to their external environment.

Event and structural players, by contrast, are constrained by the cognitive tax of over-specialisation. Event players are forced to operate in high-leverage moments repeatedly, becoming over-reliant on situations that cannot be sustainably generated, and structural players become over-reliant on teammate continuity and control. In both cases, impact becomes brittle and increasingly sensitive to the external environment.

Basketball, ultimately, is a team sport, and any individual player’s impact only exists in relation to the environment it shapes. This is where the value of dual-impact players becomes overwhelming. Because they influence both the conditions under which possessions occur and the outcomes those possessions produce, they reduce the sensitivity of a team’s success to lineup construction. This is because it allows their GMs and coaches to allocate resources more efficiently, to surround them with lineups that lean towards offense or defense without sacrificing anything. This is why historically great teams like the OKC Thunder now or the Golden State Warriors in the past could field such defensively slanted teams around Stephen Curry or Shai Gilgeous Alexander, as the multiplicity of their skill-sets means they could make up for any gaps in offense or defense.

So…Why Do We Keep Getting It Wrong?

If dual-impact players represent the fullest expression of influence within a basketball game, then it raises an uncomfortable question: why are they so often misidentified and misunderstood? At a fundamental level, we do not evaluate impact directly, we evaluate signals of impact. Basketball, as both a sport and spectacle, privileges actions that are visible and narratively decisive. Event impact fits nicely into this perception, and a tough iso bucket or a chasedown block are immediately legible to both audiences and decision makers. As a result, event players are intuitively perceived as controlling games even when their impact is episodic rather than systemic. This perceptual bias is reinforced by the inherent structure of basketball discourse itself. Highlight clips, box score, scoring averages, and usage rates all reward possession-ending actions, and even most advanced metrics remain possession-local in nature. The consequence of this is that players who exert influence by shaping the conditions of future possessions (through indirect actions) struggle to announce their own value with the same clarity.

Due to this, event players are often easily mistaken for dual-impact players. Their ability to generate high-leverage outcomes under pressure is rightly valued, but when this capacity isn’t paired with the ability to frequently improve the frequency and quality of possessions, then its overall influence is too limited. Crucially, the inverse error also exists, just in fewer cases. Structural players are often overvalued in environments that reward stability and scale, where their ability to raise baseline efficiency can be mistaken for universal sufficiency. In this sense, both event and structural players are epistemically misleading, just in inverse ways. Event players are often overvalued due to the visibility of their impact, which makes it easy to narrativise, and structural players can be overvalued for those same opposite reasons.

There is also a further distortion that emerges online in spaces where we debate basketball, once this perceptual imbalance is recognised. Because event impact is more immediately legible and thus accessible to casual fans and mainstream media discourse, more analytically literate observers can start to define their analysis in opposition to it. Structural impact, requiring specialised language and a trained eye to identify, becomes not just a category of value but a signal of understanding itself. In this way, otherwise intelligent analysts can reproduce the same error as a casual observer, converging on a form of groupthink where what is hardest to narrate is assumed to be most important.

Implications for the Draft and Free Agency

Once player impact is understood as context-dependent rather than absolute, the implications for roster construction begin to clarify themselves a little more, especially when it comes to the draft and free agency. This is due to the fact that both of these mechanisms operate under different constraints and risk profiles, which change how different impact archetypes are valued.

Let’s start with the NBA Draft, which is by definition an exercise in projection under uncertainty. Teams that are rewarded with a lottery pick are generally weaker teams that lack organisational coherence and are years away from playing meaningful playoff basketball. In these developmental contexts, event impact is inherently fragile. High-leverage, possession-deciding actions only accrue value when a team is already capable of consistently generating competitive possessions. Without that foundation, event-oriented prospects are forced into roles that exaggerate their weaknesses and develop bad habits despite gaudy box score numbers or Twitter mixtapes. We also must acknowledge historical trends and how raw scoring output has lost a lot of its relative value due to the skyrocketing of league-wide offensive efficiency. Kobe Bryant’s 35.4 points per game in 2005-06 came in a league environment where the league average ORTG was 106.2, and teams averaged roughly 94-96 possessions per game. Luka Doncic’s 33 points per game this season, however, is occurring in an environment where league ORTG exceeds 115 with roughly 101 possessions per game. This means that as the entire league has become more efficient, the marginal value of raw volume scoring has declined. This makes structurally-inclined prospects, those who generate extra possessions and stabilise lineups, the more robust draft investments, even if their high-end outcomes don’t appear as high as the next prospect.

Free agency, however, operates under some slightly different logic. Established teams, those built around one or more dual-impact players, already possess the structural capacity to survive the regular season and get to the high-leverage environments of the playoffs. In those contexts, the marginal value of additional cumulative impact diminishes, while the value of decisive impact increases. It’s in these arenas where event-oriented players who struggle to justify primary roles can truly shine, as their ability to resolve possessions can meaningfully swing playoff games. When used in shorter stints or in tilted matchups, they can buoy the defects that come with their profiles over large sample sizes.

This asymmetry helps explain why certain player profiles appear to be ‘overdrafted’ or ‘underpaid’ early, only to resurface as valuable contributors later in their careers. (I’m looking at you, Aaron Gordon and Andrew Wiggins). The most shrewd organisations understand this distinction and resist the temptation to evaluate players as static entities.

However, there is a human element to these decisions that prevents teams from disavowing the historical mistakes of the past. Draft choices must be justified immediately, and event-heavy profiles must provide a form of narrative insurance. Their impact is legible, and their upside can be sold easily to owners and fans. “The talent was undeniable” is an excuse that allows front offices to skirt public scrutiny and keep their cushy, million-dollar jobs in NBA executive roles.

Taking a Wider Look

A framework is only as useful as its ability to scale, and the distinction between cumulative and decisive impact does not stop at the individual level. In basketball, where five players share the floor and possessions are both numerous and interconnected, team performance is best understood as the aggregation of individual impact profiles. For all the Xs and Os and schemes a coach wants to run, you can’t coach out a player’s built-in tendencies they’ve developed over years and years of reps.

At this point in the article, I think it’s clear that what makes dual-impact players so valuable is the fact that they don’t grow on trees. And so, a lot of what team-building becomes is being elite at aggregation and figuring out how to maximise interactions between incomplete skill-sets. Procure too many event players on one team, and you become over-reliant on situations you can’t sustainably generate. Your success as a team hinges on shot-making and individual brilliance, which causes you to become a high-variance team. However, if you acquire too many structural players and you become over-reliant on possession and territorial control, which causes you to become a low-variance team. We can observe that in both of these cases, stacking too many of one impact type on your team causes you to increase your margin of error, which matters all too much in a large sample size sport like basketball, where outcomes are decided across multiple games across a season.

This tension helps to explain why regular season and playoff basketball often reward different team profiles. This balance between cumulative and decisive impact begins to explain why certain teams consistently out/under perform expectations in specific competition formats. In large sample size formats such as the regular season, teams built with strong cumulative foundations tend to be rewarded for their efforts. Their advantages lie in reducing variance in possession quality. Over an 82-game season, those small, repeated gains compound, insulating them from the inevitable shooting slumps that derail more volatile teams. However, as formats compress, be it a playoff series or a single elimination cup game, the equilibrium begins to shift. Smaller samples magnify variance and reduce the value of pure accumulation. In those environments, teams with a greater share of decisive impact are better equipped to survive volatility, as they possess players capable of converting limited opportunities and swinging games on only a handful of possessions.

Ultimately, the same distinction that separates players at a micro level re-emerges at the macro level of teams, which is the cognitive difference. Teams built around event-heavy profiles demand a high level of mental bandwidth to constantly pull a rabbit out of the hat to win games, and, conversely, teams built around structural players demand a level of constant concentration and collective synchronisation over long stretches, to a point that isn’t humanly possible. What separates the best teams, much like the best players, is their elasticity and adaptability, and there is an equal cost of leaning too far into one identity, just in a different currency.

The post Structure and Event appeared first on Swish Theory.

Stanford Freshman Guard blends incredible skill, speed, and feel for the game

“I’m just playing to win and just help my team however I can to just get the win.” – Ebuka Okorie on his mindset

When you combine Ebuka Okorie’s quick first-step burst, stop-and-pop pull-up shooting, masterful ball control, effective flare handles, and one-of-a-kind finesse finishing at the rim, a lethal self-creating multi-level scoring threat is born.

Okorie speeds past any defender standing in front of him, threatening to pull up for a jumper at any time from anywhere on the court or get to the rim for a high degree-of-difficulty finish that he makes look routine.

Since I’ve started scouting potential NBA draft prospects in person, no player’s finishing at the rim has stood out as much as Okorie’s in-person, between his craftiness, creativity, and soft touch finishing. If Kyrie is the mountain top of masterful, crafty handle, creative small guard finishing around the rim, Okorie has started his climb, hoping to etch his own name, plant his own flag as one of the all-time finesse finishers.

In my 2024 Interview with Ebuka, I commended him for his feel for the game, asking him about his influences:

“I really like your decision-making out there, your patience, your jump shot. Are there any players you steal moves from or model your game after?” – RK

Ebuka says he studies two of the best guard finishers to ever play:

“Yeah, I just like watching top guards like Kyrie Irving and Steph Curry, obviously. I also like watching just any All-Star guards.”

There were two other point guards who came to mind when watching Okorie play two years ago for Brewster Academy, sharing aspects of Rajon Rondo’s and Dennis Schroder’s respective games – Schroder’s blend of first step burst, point guard instincts, and heavy shooting diet of pull-up shooting and finishing at the rim; Rondo’s next-level understanding of the game, his defensive instincts to force turnovers with the heads up awareness and then to make team-first passes up the floor pushing pace off them, and that special touch, spin, placement, and timing he’d put on passes to hit his teammates right where they wanted the ball in their shooting pockets to set them up best as play-finishers.

A high-volume pick-and-roll maestro self-creating ISO killer who threatens the pull-up shot, the finesse finish, and the clean dime every time down?

Ebuka Okorie is the most underrated Lottery Pick hiding in plain sight of the 2026 NBA Draft.

Quotes

Learning Basketball, a Swish Theory Podcast:


“Unbelievable handle, exceptional burst, can shoot… high-variance upside bet… absurd scorer.” – Ben Pfeifer, Swish Theory


“He can finish any shot you can think of at the rim.” – Ryan Kaminski, Swish Theory


Stanford HC Kyle Smith on Okorie’s draft status:

“My pitch has been – if you want to be in the place where you are leading a team and getting the most minutes to develop what you want to be as a pro, and essentially, we’re pros now, they’re getting paid. So I think Stanford’s the best option.

But… Look, you’re leading a team, you’re 19. But now, if someone in the NBA says, hey, we’re gonna take you at 12 and you’re our starting point guard, well, that’s something to consider.”

NCAA Moments, Impact & Efficiency

(all data as of 3.11.26)

Okorie walked onto Stanford’s campus as a four-star as the 12th-rated point guard in the country. (On3, 247)

Ebuka’s +10.3 C-RAM ranks in the Top-10 among top 2026 Draft Prospects, via Cerebro Sports.

Okorie’s all-around game at Stanford is rated highly by Cerebro – as a defender (86 DSI, 1.6 STL/gm), floor general (69 FGS, 3.6 AST / 1.8 TOV), 3pt shooter (80 3PE, 2 3PM on 36% 3P%), and scorer. (87 DSI, 23 PPG on 46% FG%)

Combining his high school stats with his freshman college stats for a total of 81 college+high school level games tracked by Cerebro, Okorie shot 53% 2P% on 534 2PA, 35.6% 3P% on 396 3PA, 83.5% FT% on 315 FTA, scoring 58.6% TS% overall.

Ranking 5th in the country in scoring and 2nd among freshmen (23.1 PPG), even ahead of Cameron Boozer, Ebuka Okorie is more than just a crafty point guard; he’s a certified walking bucket. Okorie’s seven 30-point games are tied for the most by any freshman in ACC history (Marvin Bagley) and fourth among any player all-time in the conference’s history. On top of being selected to the All-ACC 1st Team & All-ACC Rookie Team, Okorie’s scoring average is on pace to pass RJ Barrett for the top mark in ACC history by any freshman ever, while being the nation’s co-leader in games with 25+ PTS scored. (14g)

Okorie’s handle is simply electric, with few able to accelerate, stop on a dime, change directions, and throw in dribble combo moves along the way as smoothly as Ebuka makes it look.

The scoring has been incredible, and what’s even more impressive is his rapid development, consistently improving as the season goes on. Starting the season with 4 20pt games, dropping 3 30pt games soon after, then dropping the hammer with a 36 PT – 9 AST statement game vs UNC to put this Stanford team on the national radar.

Cracking the 40pt mark in a blowout over Georgia Tech, Ebuka reached that total with only 3 3PM, showing his scoring abilities within the arc (9/15 2P) and ability to maneuver his body smartly to draw the foul. (13/13 FTA). Squeezing in another 30pt game against Pitt, once again Ebuka showed off his smooth scoring abilities inside the arc (8/13 2P) and at the free throw line (9/9 FT); the game before, against California, the 6’2″ guard pulled down 13 rebounds.

Dropping 33 PTS on 71% eFG% vs NC State, Okorie showed off the double-edged sword of floor-bending gravity as a pull-up three pick-and-roll artist – rising and firing for off the dribble jumpers as he navigates picks and gets to his spots, splashing three dagger off-the-dribble threes, countering off the threat of the shot with the explosive drive by splitting the defenders in a quick Horns set attacking the gap and driving through the paint for an open lay-in.

Okorie’s ability to operate a multitude of pick-and-rolls at a high level, stretching the floor on ball to open driving lanes to attack, draw fouls, or kick is one foundation of how he can be relied on likely quickly at the NBA level to create advantages for himself and teammates in the most popular action in the league.

Ebuka Okorie’s 2025-26 Stanford Cardinal Synergy Efficiency Stats

In every overall basketball situation, Synergy rates Ebuka Okorie as “very good” or “excellent”; Okorie rates especially high overall (1.09 PPP), half court (1.05 PPP), Sidelines Out Of Bounds Sets (1.24 PPP), After Time Out sets (1.2 PPP), against a Press (1.15 PPP). Okorie can give you buckets in practically any situation, however you want to get scored on, whether you guard him man-to-man (1.03 PPP) or with zone. (1.35 PPP). Okorie’s half-court play types are highly efficient, especially in his highest volume play of running pick-and-rolls (1.05 PPP, 90th percentile), along with his third-highest volume play of running ISOs (1.11 PPP, 87th percentile). He also scores a very good rate in transition (1.24 PPP) and on Spot Ups (1.07 PPP).

Ebuka’s offensive repertoire is vast: he can initiate offense with and without ball-screens, score off picks and off the dribble, and threaten the defense off the ball from deep with closeout-attack drives to counter. This all makes him a versatile scoring guard off the bat.

When including passes, Okorie’s volume of pick-and-rolls increases by twice the volume (415 poss) while dipping in overall efficiency, but still efficient overall offense at 0.97 PPP. Okorie is a trap-killer in pick-and-roll, averaging 1.38 PPP in such situations, making defenses pay huge in the 16 times they’ve tried this season, rating 92nd percentile; when the ‘defense commits’, however, that drops to 0.83 PPP. (229 poss).

Including passes on ISOs, Okorie’s efficiency stays equally as impressive at 1.11 PPP, with about thirty extra possessions; so, whether Okorie passed or shot out of ISO, the advantages he created in 1-on-1 led to an extremely efficient look for his team.

What stands out overall is Okorie’s range of good-to-great efficiency in such a variety of playtypes and situations. That much versatile scoring efficiency is one example of good feel decision-making, reading and reacting to defenses to make the best play for your team, and the individual advantage-creation and scoring ability to execute consistently.

Okorie’s Shooting Touch & Athleticism Indicators are all promising to translate to the next level:

50% FG% on 30 Runners (FLOATA)
35% 3P% on 101 Pull-Up 3PA
36% 3P% on 67 C&S 3PA
51% FG% on 221 Layups
100% FG% on 9 Dunks
84% FT% on 214 FTA

Measuring Two-Way Feel and understanding of how to play the game is not fully quantifable.

Two stats that show the results of Okorie’s decisions: 1) as a safe decision-making passer with a 102 AST/50 TO Assist-to-Turnover ratio, and 2) as a sound defender racking up 45 STL + 9 BLK / 38 PF Stocks-per-Foul ratio. Creating advantages and creating scoring opportunities that lead to good looks for yourself and your teammates, and doing so without turning the ball over, shows good decision-making process as a primary on-ball decision-making creator. Forcing turnovers without fouling via well-timed digs, jumping passing lanes, timing up help-side blocks, and deterring drives with active hands are examples of a high-feel defender.

In the highest-rated class in NCAA Freshman BPM history, Ebuka Okorie ranks 9th in BPM among freshmen. Change those barttorvik filters to the entire NCAA in 2026, and Okorie ranks 36th. Change them again to Only Freshman from Any NCAA Season back to 2008, and Okorie rates T-45th with Kon Knueppel, Derrick Rose, DeMarcus Cousins, Zhaire Smith, and Collin Murray-Boyles. For reference on the magnitude of this draft class, the average draft features ~2 players with a >10 BPM, via Jeremias Engelmann; the 2026 draft is on course to feature 6 players with BPMs over +12 BPM, and by my count, roughly 25+ potential draft prospects with over a +9.0 BPM; the depth of talent in this class is utterly insane.

Here is some statistical company for three marks Okorie reached:

As of March 11, 2026, 31 freshman since 2008 have scored at a 54.5% TS% rate, assisted 19.5% of their team’s passes when on the floor, and forced 1.95% of their team’s steals while on the floor, with an over 7.0 BPM rating, visualized below. Only top prospects and star offensive players rank higher than Okorie in overall BPM impact in this group: Cameron Boozer, Cooper Flagg, Kingston Flemings, James Harden, Lonzo Ball, Reed Sheppard, D’Angelo Russell, Trae Young, Ben Simmons. These minimums attempt to show all-around scoring efficiency and decision-making among high-impact two-way college freshmen since 2008, when Bartorvik’s available data begins* (*close 2PA, shots at the rim, are not recorded until 2010).

Ebuka Okorie’s Historical Stats via Barttorvik

To highlight Ebuka Okorie’s incredible advantage creation, efficient team scoring, and sound decision making, the chart below shows how Okorie is record-low in TOV% among high volume creators and has created as many shots at the rim for himself as any big name prospect besides Boozer since 2008.

How is a 6’2″ Guard not only getting past his defender, penetrating the paint, and getting to the rim, but also finishing this efficiently while doing so?

Ebuka Okorie’s Historical Stats via Barttorvik

Another interesting query highlights Okorie’s ability to get to the rim by limiting this list to filter for freshmen who have taken 200+ close shots at the rim, shrinking the group to five-star downhill prospects:

Cameron Boozer, Cooper Flagg, Trae Young, De’Aaron Fox, Ben Simmons…and Ebuka Okorie.

Not only do I see Okorie as a special finisher at the rim based on his crafty layup skills in person, but he’s also next-level elite at creating the advantages necessary to get to the rim. at a high rate as a small guard on insanely high usage, touches, and shot volume while maintaining scoring and shooting efficiency, and posting the lowest turnover percentage of any of the players on any of these lists.

When you combine his quick processing and quick movements with his total control of the ball, his body, and the situation, plus his scoring touch from every level, Okorie flashes real potential as a primary decision-making offensive engine scoring creator – a scoring point guard a team can put the ball in the hands of and rely on to create a good look for the team every time down the floor, because he can score and create efficiently out of nearly any situation and playtype.

Good things happen with the ball in Ebuka Okorie’s hands. Statistically, he has the best turnover rate for a high-volume scorer and passer of any freshman since 2010. Okorie is the only freshman since 2008 to post 20+% AST% with below 13% TOV%, let alone rate 3% better than the next closest assist rate at 2nd (Cam Boozer), via Barttorvik.

Among the 460 freshman since 2008 with 20% Assist and 2% Steal rates, Okorie’s 10.2% TOV% ranks 1st and his +9.5 BPM rank 12th all time. Expanding to every college player since 2008, Okorie ranks 7th in TOV% among the 382 who met these minimums of TS% ≥ 54.5; Assist % ≥ 19.5; Steal % ≥ 1.95; Box +/- ≥ 7.1. Okorie handling his insane on-ball usage and shot volume, maintaining scoring efficiency across the board, and ranking all-time great in the turnover ranks for high-volume creators is an incredible feat showing his primary decision-maker capabilities.

Excerpt from my 2024 Sunshine Classic Scouting Report on Swish Theory

Ebuka Okorie popped out with decision-making, passing chops, and tough shotmaking at the rim and on pull-up jumpers, with decisive feel and defensive instincts leading to routine winning plays.

Ebuka Okorie’s crafty finishing at the rim, decision making feel running the show, splashy pull-up 3pt range, anticipation jumping passing lanes for steals and timing up blocks for turnovers deserves to be highlighted.

Dante Allen, Ebuka Okorie, CJ Ingram stood out the most in the tournament statistically by their overall impact and defense, with the Montverde duo also rating highly in rebounding/rim-protecting measures; all three were the standout prospects in overall impact (C-RAM), each registering over 10+ C-RAM respectively.

Ebuka Okorie rated 2nd in overall impact (over 10+ C-RAM) and very highly on the defensive end, rating 4th of all players. (97 DSI).

Ebuka was just as impressive on the offensive end, rating 2nd as a scorer (88 PSP) and 2nd at passer (79 FGS) at the 2024 Sunshine Classic, via Cerebro Sports.

Okorie slotted in as the 12th best 3pt shooter (72 3PE)

Okorie (and Dante Allen) again stand out on this chart as offensive engines, rating among the best as scorers, playmakers, and 3pt shooters, showing they could be the most reliable scoring creators from the 2024 Sunshine Classic.

#2 Ebuka Okorie (Stanford)
6’2″ Guard 2025

Incredible decision-making feel
Crafty finisher around the rim
Real two-way impact forcing turnovers
Clean Pull-Up and C&S 3pt jumper rhythm shooter
Great vision executing half-court offense, finding open teammates
Willing passer giving up good shots for better shots
Defensive instincts timing up steals and blocks

19 PTS – 3 AST – 1 REB – 2 BLK – 8/11 FG (26 MIN)
vs. LuHi

Crafty finish up-and-under hanging in the air at the rim
Soft touch finger roll high off the glass
Good body control, deceleration
Tough contested finish at the rim with soft touch
Nice block timing
Crafty finishes all around the rim all game long
Up-and-under reverse
Beats buzzer through contact for tough finish at the rim with defender draped all over him and no foul called

15 PTS – 6 AST – 3 REB – 4 STL – 3/7 3P – 5/10 FG (29 MIN)
vs. Orangeville

Good anticipation on Steal
Smooth stroke pull-up triple
Patient decision making, good feel and decision to shoot of the handoff
Unselfish pass from good to shot to great shot in open corner shooter
Smooth C&S 3 off screen, playcall seems to be named “leg”
Nice decision dumpoff pass

2024 Interview with Ebuka Okorie

For one last peek in Okorie’s mindset as a player, person, and teammate, here’s the remainder of our interview:


RK – I really liked the patient decision-making, your ability to read the floor. How would you describe your mindset when you’re in the game?

Ebuka – ”I’m just playing to win and just help my team however I can to just get the win.”


RK – You’re off to Stanford. What led to that decision?

Ebuka – “It’s a really good school in terms of academics and obviously basketball, so I just felt like it was the best fit for me.”


RK – What kind of skills are you trying to develop and add to your game over the coming years?

Ebuka – “I’m just trying to develop all parts of my game. Getting stronger, quicker, just like all parts of my game, just still working hard.”

Q. How would you all describe yourselves as teammates off the floor?

Ebuka – “Yeah, I’d say like we’re just around each other all the time, and our chemistry just keeps going up every single time, every day.”

RK – One last question. Your teammate, Dwayne Aristode, wasn’t able to make this trip; he’s dealing with an injury. How would you describe him as a teammate and a person?

Ebuka – “Yeah, obviously he’s a great player. He’s also a great teammate, like he’ll pick us up like if we’re having a bad practice or something, he’s always here for us.”

Updated Data Visualizations highlighting Ebuka Okorie’s Two-Way Upside

The above charts show Ebuka Okorie ranks T-4th in Wingspan-to-Height Plus Minus and Stocks Per Foul in this class, great defensive indicators for the next level. His scoring, passing, 3pt shooting, and defense levels are all good to great with extremely high overall impact via Cerebro Sports data.

What ultimately stands out most about Okorie’s game is not just his outlier super power ability to get to the rim or any spot he wants, its his complete game – his crafty handle, sound anticipation, defensive instincts, dangerously quick first step burst, masterful start-stop body control, efficient scoring versatility, clear playmaking vision, sublime shooting, smooth finishing touch, and earned confidence – combined with one other super power – his impressive decision making on the basketball court, putting all these pieces of the puzzle together.

A team-first decision-maker with the ability to get to any spot and make any shot at any time, with or without the help of a screen, who can beat you with speed and touch to stretch the floor in both directions at once, is one versatile offensive weapon.

A 6’2″ high-volume shot creator with record-high impact, record-high rim attempts, and record-low turnovers who creates advantage at wills and shots consistently for his team, Okorie’s overall scoring versatility, pick-and-roll mastery, mean pull-up jumper, and knack for attacking the rack makes him one of the most efficient shot creators of any draft prospect.

A truly masterful point guard who can force turnovers on defense and do it all on offense; not just dribble, pass, shoot as a base skill-set, but massive potential on the ball with his ability to penetrate the paint and create good looks for his team consistently with ease off his lightning-quick first step burst, total start stop body control, flashy handle ball control, mean pull-up jumper and cerebral feel for the game.

Ebuka Okorie is the 2026 NBA Draft Lottery Pick hiding in plain sight.

The post Ebuka Okorie: A Lottery Pick Hiding in Plain Sight appeared first on Swish Theory.

As I go through this intense process, I normally have one or two players who stand out to me. Not because I like or dislike them, but because I find them to be particularly testing for my process. This year, it is fair to say that Amari Allen from Alabama fits the bill.

Allen has some serious fans within the Draft-sphere. Per Jon Chepkevich who just released his annual ‘consensus board‘, Allen ranks 24th. That may not seem overly high, but there are some high placements in there. In the model of our very own Wafe, Allen comes in in 6th place. One of my favourite Twitter follows, JPR from The Center Hub, has him ranked 8th. Any player will have fans at well above consensus, but I believe it’s fair to call Allen polarising.

The high-end sell of Amari Allen is that he is an ambidextrous player who can pass, drive, and shoot, and processes well. While watching his film, I found myself sitting somewhere in the middle. I see a player with tools, but who needs to sharpen some of them to make an impact in the NBA. I wouldn’t call the value theoretical, as he is objectively a good player, but I ran into some issues on the film despite the statistical profile seeming well-rounded.

I will go much deeper throughout the piece, but I want to give a basic outline up front. I largely believe he has capabilities as a pass, drive, and shoot player, but the driving is underdeveloped right now. I also believe the defense is solid positionally, which explains why he has solid numbers for both blocks and steals, but I don’t see him as a major disruptor on that end, even if I believe his physical tools are quite enticing. Largely, the driving is where I hope to see development and why I ultimately want him to return.

Amari Allen’s Role

There’s a good argument to be made that Nate Oats is the best offensive mind in the entirety of basketball. Others may have more exotic schemes, but in terms of putting things into practice and getting the best out of his players, Oats is probably the best I’ve seen. It sometimes means we deem Bama players as having more of a ceiling than they show, largely because he puts them in such an optimised role.

Allen’s role is largely what I’d call a perimeter attacker. He isn’t the lead creator, and there aren’t necessarily pet sets for him, but his job is to drive off the catch, attack closeouts, and be a rim finisher. It’s a good use of his shooting ability and his above-average court mapping. Below is a good visual of his role from the excellent Hoop Explorer site.

As you can see, he’s attacking, kicking the ball out, and working in transition. Oats rarely asks him to take dribble jumpers and he almost never gets to showcase any kind of in-between game, because a Nate Oats offense drastically cuts down on those shots and disincentivises them.

Part of his role is also being a secondary Pick-And-Roll ball handler, which I deem to be an area for improvement. Per Synergy, he is in the 62nd percentile for frequency of all PNR plays (including passes), but in the 44th percentile for efficiency. This number drops to 15th percentile when the ‘defense commits’, which essentially just means when they play man to man defense and commit to guarding both the roller and the ball-handler, with traps and hedges being calculated separately.

So, Allen is being asked to drive quite often, with Oats asking him to do it from a lot of different scenarios that involve both with and without ball screens. This is good for a film student because it means we get to see the full picture, which isn’t a luxury with other players who can often play for coaches or in situations that suppress certain things we need to see. The question is, what does the film tell me?

Amari Allen’s Driving and Finishing

Let’s start with the raw driving before we get into the nitty-gritty of Pick-And-Roll play.

Allen’s driving is largely a bit of a rollercoaster. He’s strong and has flashed some incredibly impressive moves when he gets inside the arc. Where it can be adventurous is before we reach that point, as he can sometimes struggle to generate separation.

Just to give a note for the reader, I do not start clipping stuff until I have formed my overall take. I watch everything, form an opinion, then pick clips that back up my opinions. Watching film to anchor biases or to look for the truth you want is bad process.

Below is a play from the game against Auburn.

Allen pump-fakes to get Pettiford in the air, but struggles to gain any kind of separation while driving left, and ends up throwing up a pass that was never on. He doesn’t seem to be comfortable going to any kind of decel move, which is a problem as he doesn’t often separate at the top of the drive.

Generally speaking, he struggled against physicality at the point of attack, but was better against it around the basket. Here’s another example from a game against Clemson.

Allen drives from the slot, first trying to go left but going right after getting nowhere. He seems to generally prefer going to the right on film. He gets decent territory inside the paint, but never really compromises the defender at any point, and after trying a move, he ends up throwing up a wild shot that gets blocked.

Allen is strong, which means he can sometimes generate position as a driver. It’s just quite often not the most convincing endeavour. The play below against Kentucky illustrates this further.

Allen attempts to drive, but generates little separation, which means Jaland Lowe can just poke the ball out from behind him because he’s able to both stop the drive and not be overly worried about Allen going to a second move in the half-court.

A notable part of Amari Allen’s profile compared to others I’ve watched is that he attempts to be ambidextrous. This is likely good for his long-term development, even if it nukes his efficiency in the short-term. The reason I’m bringing this up is that, while a lot of the struggles come from driving left, I feel they are notable when going right, and I would not say he’s a standstill separator or anything like that.

Here’s an example of another problem when driving left that relates to a few things.

Allen gets a good (possibly illegal) flat ball screen and powers past his man, but, even though there is almost no rim protection, takes his attempt very wide to the left and ends up completely missing. While he struggles separating at the top of the drive, it feels as if the handle when he gets into these areas can be quite inconsistent, though it does show up more when he drives to the left.

On the topic of his ambidextrous nature, I hand-tracked all of his layups on the year. He is shooting 61 percent on right-handed layups (33/54), and 45 percent on left-handed layups (11/24). There are occasions when he’s able to get the ball to his right-hand even while driving to the left, but if it’s a left-handed attempt, he is much less comfortable on the whole.

Where it gets more murky is that a lot of his best finishes are in transition. Per CBB Analytics, Allen is shooting just 44 percent on two-pointers in the Half-Court which is 23rd percentile across D1 Basketball.

Though he isn’t much of a separator with his dribble moves or with a first step, I do believe it’s notable and important that he’s able to be strong against other wings. He can, however, struggle more against big guys such as on this rep against Thomas Haugh.

Where the driving becomes interesting is that there are some seriously impressive flashes. Flashes are a buzzword that can definitely rile some draft scouts, particularly on the spreadsheet side of Twitter. I largely agree with these critiques, however, I’m not going to completely ignore some very good stuff with his drives due to his age and his room for improvement. Below is my favourite drive from his tape so far.

Allen sizes up his cross-match in transition and completely shreds him. He gets low (which is something I look for when I’m analysing handle), then shows agility to get back into the lane. Compare that to the lefty layup against Mississippi State, and it’s night and day.

This one against Clemson is also impressive. He gets the switch on a PNR, and his screener largely doesn’t give him much to work with. He then power steps and crosses back into a Eurostep and finishes off the glass. If he gets into the paint with some kind of force behind him, he does have some very capable east-west moves. The question I keep circling back to is how often will he reach these areas.

This one against Arkansas is also great. He really seems to get a lot of force when driving into the paint, so it gives him more power whenever he goes to his East-West moves.

Let’s, however, compare what this looks like when going to his left.

Bama throws him the ball at the elbow on the out-of-bounds play, essentially giving him an Isolation. He sends his man darting backwards, but he doesn’t quite have the same comfort when he is on his left. One factor I may want to consider here is that Nate Oats doesn’t like his players taking any kind of mid-range shot. When watching this play, I wonder if Allen would have felt more comfortable with a turnaround jumper after sending Tyler Nickel flying. Instead, we get a tough left-handed miss.

The driving is largely an area where Allen needs work, but there are some tools there that make me think he may put it together. It’s probably the main reason I hope he returns. He’s strong, I’d just like to see more efficiency on the drives and possibly some way of separating that isn’t just pure strength.

On the topic of driving, it makes sense to dive into his finishing. I noted earlier that his desire to be ambidextrous slightly nerfs his overall percentages. But it would be fair to say that his finishing profile is quite average overall. It’s above average at a push, but the main reason for it is that he doesn’t possess the handle to make things easier on himself at the rim. As mentioned previously, he’s shooting 45 percent on 2s in the Half-Court.

One thing I do appreciate about Allen is that he gets good hangtime on his layup attempts. There appears to be more difficulty with self-created ones, but I feel this is a notable factor in projecting future improvement. Here’s a good play below.

Alabama runs the Noah LaRoche ‘Wheel’ Pattern in early offense. Allen sinks to the corner, attacks the closeout, and finishes strong through the rim protector. In these tilted or short-manned floor situations, I feel the finishing shows up a little better. While we should expect this, I still believe it to be notable. Below is another example.

This one comes in early offense, but Allen drives past his man with a crossover and gets good hang time before finishing off the glass. He’s athletic and capable of finishing through contact. Something I will note is that I’m often not a fan of indexing on ‘flashes’. An experienced scout once told me, to my shock, that ‘Jonathan Isaac Movement Shooting Flashes exist’. However, there are enough of these from Allen for me not to be completely out on him as a finisher, though the first level of driving needs work. Here are a few more.

They run Elbow Chicago, and he dives to the rim after screening and finishes through contact. Again, a play did the early legwork for him, but he still managed to finish the play for Alabama.

Here is a play against one of the very best.

After some early offense broke down, Bama swung the ball back to Allen at the top of the key. He gets a clear lane, and, even though that’s a relevant factor, I still find it impressive that he goes right through Ruben Chinyelu for the easy finish.

Something I will also add to this is that Amari Allen was seriously drawing fouls at the start of the year, which makes sense when you consider his hang time and the physicality he sometimes shows. This has declined in recent games. Amari Allen missed the final 2 games of February with an injury. Since then, per BartTorvik, his FTR is down to 29.1, which is a drastic drop off from the 45.2 he was rocking previously. You could argue that the off-ball strength-based finishing and foul drawing are the best part of his scoring profile, so this is something to monitor. He’s only attempted one free throw in his last three games.

Something I do see as a pattern is that his better flashes seem to come when Bama are spaced out in five-out. Being in five-out does not automatically equate to spacing, but it does appear he is more comfortable as a driver and finisher when things are already tilted for him.

Allen isn’t a guy I project to be a high-volume driver as of now; there isn’t enough evidence of separation on the film. I, however, see enough to believe he could be a decent play finisher on offense. It’s just a question of how good the numbers get.

The reason I bring this up is that I believe Amari Allen’s best half-court reps came as a PNR Roll man. It wasn’t something they leaned into all that often, but when they do, it is very effective and showcases some of his talents. Firstly, he just shows good feel for when to dive or roll, which matters. Not all screeners are equal no matter their dimensions.

Here’s a simple look at it. Bama goes to a guard screening action, and Allen makes the simple read to the corner.

They went to it in a game against Texas, as well.

They run ‘Ram’ action, and Allen hangs in the air before making the dump off pass to the big man for an easy finish.

While this action often led to Allen getting potential assists, there were times when he was strong finishing through contact on these play-types, too, such as below.

Bama runs ‘Ram Exit’ with a smallball lineup. Allen gets the ball on the roll, gets met with size, but steps through him and scores the layup.

Allen has also hit threes out of these play types too, showing good feel for when to move, and he has decent shooting numbers and good shooting mechanics on the whole.

Ultimately, where I find myself gravitating towards with Amari Allen is envisioning him as a diverse play finisher. The NBA is changing a lot. The days of standstill high PNR are over. Will Hardy and Quin Snyder popularised ‘5 slot’, which involves putting your center on the wing, something Duke has now made their core half-court offense. What this effectively means is that bigs are doing perimeter stuff, and there is more room for wings and even guards to be play finishers.

Teams would not specifically run plays for Allen unless he was picked very high, but I feel that a team who has guard or wing screens as part of their Half-Court offense, such as Charlotte, Boston, or Indiana, might benefit from such a player. I try and see a path for any player I scout, and I feel this is the best possible path I currently see for him. If he returns, this may change. The idea of Allen joining a guard-screening heavy team and working inside off-the-ball is the best path I see on offense as of now. Effectively, for a team running a modern 5-out offense, can he be a shooter and screener who finishes inside?

Where that sell gets more complex is that his current numbers, while not bad, are not truly elite. There are logical reasons to talk yourself into them improving, but to what extent is the great question you must answer if you’re going to buy into my idea of him being a play finisher.

Amari Allen’s Processing

My biggest hesitancy with regards to projecting Allen into a larger offensive role is that his processing on offense is quite inconsistent. I take Synergy percentiles with a pinch of salt largely because they can be mistracked and only include actions where the player ended up shooting or turning the ball over, when there are realistically more than those outcomes.

However, one that really stood out to me was that Amari Allen is in the 14th percentile as a PNR Ball Handler when the ‘defense commits’. From watching every one of these clips, I concluded that it means when the handler and the roller are both accounted for by one defender. This particular playlist does include plays where he passes, so it’s not entirely on him, and Alabama doesn’t really have the most athletic center room.

He can often make very scripted reads that lead to turnovers.

Alabama runs Ram 77 Empty Exit, a nasty play that is almost guaranteed to lead to a good shot.

Allen doesn’t show much comfort despite basically having every option available to him. He has the opportunity to shoot himself, hit the roll man, or even make a quick dump-off pass to the three-point shooter. He instead stares down the roll man, and Krivas gets the steal. This admittedly is a very good Arizona team, but it was incredibly obvious where Allen wanted to go with the ball.

Here’s a similar example below against Mississippi State.

They run a PNR with a wide ball screen on the weak side, admittedly one that isn’t perfectly set, but it’s enough to occupy everyone. Allen gets into the lane but misses his window to Taylor Bol Bowen, which allows the defense time to recover. He also goes for a jump pass, but there wasn’t anything on the weak side to sell, so it just telegraphed where he wanted to go.

Let’s watch below:

For anyone who read my Javon Small piece last year, you’ll note that I quoted Jake Rosen, who said that a good way to spot a faulty processor is to watch how often they stare down the first reads as opposed to reacting to what they’re seeing. Here’s a good example. Bama runs a simple high PNR. The corner man tags aggressively, which gives Allen a clear window to skip to the corner. Instead, he missed it, and ended up picking up his dribble and turning it over. Sometimes you only get one window. Elite creators can open more windows, but most can’t.

Allen’s handle isn’t outright bad, but there are times it can slow his processing a little. Think of it like sometimes you think of things before your body can actually execute them. This play is a good example.

Allen misses Bol Bowen on the roll, then misses him again when he tries to go left. He ends up getting stuck in no man’s land and tries to hit a backdoor cut to a player who is out of bounds. Sure, the off-ball Bama players don’t cover themselves in glory, but he also can dribble himself into these spots sometimes where it becomes a lot more difficult. If you miss windows, it’s sometimes hard to get them re-opened.

Sometimes the problems are caused by the fact that because Allen doesn’t consistently separate at the top of his drives, the reads are murkier, as defenders will play closer to their off-ball assignments if they know their teammate has it. But he does also just miss reads and sometimes struggles to move through possessions in PNR. I do not project him to be much of a PNR threat as of now, he’s better in more ancillary play-types.

I am not meaning to hold Amari Allen to the standard of a primary. I more just want to challenge the notion of someone being a ‘pass, drive and shoot’ player as I feel it’s an overused description of players. He’s capable of driving, I just don’t quite know how good the processing is, and it’s notably at its worst in PNR situations. This largely matters if someone is going to be a drive-heavy player, which many project Allen as.

Defense

To say Alabama has struggled defensively would be quite the understatement. They lack rim deterrence and have taken some big scorelines this season. Despite this, Amari Allen has been relatively solid. He’s above 2 percent for block and steal rates, which is a good summary about how I feel about him as a defender currently. I don’t believe he’s elite, but he is very positionally solid. I would feel comfortable saying I’ve barely seen him get beaten off-ball. On a team with the defensive lows Alabama can have, this is notable.

Allen is positionally sound, and his best plays have come as a nail helper or as a low-man, such as below:

Clemson runs Delay Chicago: a staple yet very effective play. Allen keeps his eye on the driving guard despite his man clearing for 3, and when he crosses over, Allen instantly shifts to come up with an incredible block. He gets good verticality generally and doesn’t seem to have much trouble with his timing. Below is possibly my favourite defensive play of the cycle.

Amari Allen is initially the low man and flies out to contest Meleek Thomas. Thomas sidesteps him, but in basically the same motion, Allen jumps from a standstill and blocks Thomas’ shot with his right hand. The verticality is genuinely very impressive. He strikes me as the type of defender who would really thrive in a Tom Thibodeau-style defensive scheme where he’s being aggressive at the nail and then jumping out to shooters on the weak side.

As a scheme-driven defender, I think he can be a really good player for an NBA team. He’s strong and genuinely did well in quite a tough defensive context. The steal and block numbers being decent rather than elite kind of match up to what I’ve watched on film. He’s positionally sound and doesn’t chase stuff, and gets his actions by doing his job.

The only real issue I found with him defensively is that he’s a little bit worse at the point of action than you’d want. He can be caught off guard by screens quite often; it’s a definite pattern.

Auburn runs an angled Spain PNR to an empty side. It’s a difficult play to stop, but just focus on Allen here. He’s completely blindsided by the screen because he’s not playing with his head on a swivel. The reason I can be lenient on defense is that I do believe it’s a team sport, and that’s often misunderstood in individual analysis. But Allen did have plenty of plays like this where he was so hyper-focused on his man that a screen completely blindsided him. Most modern NBA Defenses don’t want to give up any kind of middle penetration, so it’s an issue to iron out, even if it is really the only issue I have with his defense.

Here’s a similar example against Auburn.

Auburn runs a pick-and-roll from the slot. Allen is guarding Pettiford, which isn’t an easy task for anyone, but particularly wings, as Pettiford is so crafty at the top of his drives. Allen again doesn’t have much awareness of the fact that he is about to be screened, which gives Pettiford an easy route downhill. Once you have a 4-on-3 with someone of Pettiford’s craft on the ball, it is largely over. Bama does well to delay him, but eventually the player guarded by the nail helper scores an easy one at the rim.

Overall, don’t take this as nitpicking. I just want to create a full picture. Allen is a good defender. I don’t know if I see an All-NBA type ceiling, but I’d expect him to be comfortably above average. He’s strong, has good instincts, and has good timing, which meshes well with his ability to get vertical very quickly. The point-of-action defense is a concern I have, but it might not be something that’s tested all that often. As a helper, he will be NBA-level from day one.

Concluding Thoughts

Overall, Amari Allen is probably the most interesting player I’ve watched so far. When you browse Draft Twitter or even places like Reddit and Discord, you’ll find a lot of takes and quick-fire slogans about players. I mentioned some, such as ‘pass drive and shoot wing’ and ‘ambidextrous slasher’, which I saw. There is some truth in these, but I always aspire to go deeper with my analysis where I can.

My ultimate take is that I have concerns about what the offensive role looks like at the next level, from an upside perspective. As of now, the top of his drives are quite underdeveloped, even if there are some nice east-west flashes. I will, however, note that NBA offense isn’t 4 people taking turns to drive from standstill positions. But it’s fair to question the offensive role when the shooting and rim numbers are only ‘good,’ and he’s yet to show a tonne in the half-court outside of ‘flashes’. Being a top-end creator, even as a third option, does require some form of standout skill, and I don’t know what Allen’s is yet.

He will likely be good at the ancillary stuff as he can rebound, hit spot-up threes, and has good feel as a screener. Guard screening is definitely becoming more viable and important with the rise of 5-slot and inverted offenses in the modern NBA, but it’s also fair to say the floor for being good offensively seems to get higher every year.

What I keep coming back to long-term is that his profile is well-rounded, and that seems to matter. I’m nowhere near the Bart Querier of someone such as Avi or Finn, but I will post this one that I checked was ethical.

He can do a lot of things quite well. It’s not unreasonable to believe that he may sharpen one of these tools. Nate Oats believes he has another level to show as an offensive player. But as of now I don’t quite know what the standout trait or standout skill is. If he declares, the day-one uses to a team would be his defense and his rebounding with a bit of spot-up shooting mixed in. I just worry about him as a ‘pre-draft’ candidate, given the driving has quite a way to go.

When scouting, I often come up with a few hypotheticals for the player I’m scouting, ones I deem to be important to the overall process. Revisiting my earlier point about him possibly being a play finisher, this is the hypothetical I keep coming back to.

• Is any of the shooting profile good enough to really be a play finisher at the next level?

The shooting is solid, the layup percentage is alright, and he may have an in-between game when not playing for Nate Oats. But none are truly elite right now. I’d say the banker for serious improvement comes down to his driving game developing quite significantly, which is why I’m hoping he returns to Alabama. I just don’t know how much hope I’d put on this. I also think it’s fair to say that even if the first steps become more crisp, the handle might limit him, as he does need to pick up his dribble quite often. He is powerful, but the 2-point scoring issues go all the way back to his AAU Days. I’m likely of the opinion that the efficiency isn’t there right now for me to draft him at consensus if he declares this year.

Overall, I’d say Allen is a high-floor player who, if he declares, I’d rank somewhere between 22 and 28. I don’t have a board yet, but I think the defense could be quite impactful, and he does have room to grow. But the thing I keep coming back to is, where do you get with the offense. I can’t be out on him as the metrics are good, and his good games are also impressive. If he returns, he’s someone I’m watching for next season.

The post Understanding Amari Allen appeared first on Swish Theory.