A strong freshman season with notable statistics offers an encouraging rubric of sorts. As a lower-usage wing (16% usage rate), Riley still managed to get to the foul line at a solid clip (1.3 shooting fouls drawn per 40 minutes) and shot efficiently inside the arc (61.3 2P%), proving to be a key piece of San Francisco’s offense while flashing game-changing potential on defense.

According to the RAPM (Regularized Adjusted Plus/Minus) metric from CBB Analytics, which measures on-court impact without relying on individual box score stats, Riley ranked in the 98th percentile nationally (5.8). He also finished in the WCC Top 20 in Evan Miya’s BPR metric, ranking second among rookies behind only Mikey Lewis of Saint Mary’s.

Going back to the 2007-08 season, only seven Division I freshmen have shot better than 60 percent on 2-point attempts while recording 25 or more dunks and attempting at least five 3-pointers per 100 possessions. Riley cleared all those benchmarks last season, including 35 dunks and 5.4 3-point attempts per 100 possessions, joining a list that includes five first-round picks since the 2018 Draft: Mikal Bridges, Lonzo Ball, Chet Holmgren, Noah Clowney and Asa Newell.

However, a new challenge awaits Riley this season. With significant roster turnover, he steps into a larger role with plenty to prove, including a claim as a top mid-major prospect. How will he explore the studio space on offense? Can he elevate his game even further on defense? Before projecting ahead, let’s rewind and take a closer look at what Riley showed on film last season.

Team Defense & Athleticism

At 6-foot-6 and 200 pounds, Riley is on the lean side, but there’s some strength to his game and shows it when battling for rebounds and finishing cuts around the basket. With his long frame, he has the potential to add muscle and get even stronger, while his ranginess contributes significantly to his defensive upside.

Riley is a consistent contributor on the glass, posting a defensive rebound rate of 16.9 percent. During WCC play, that number dipped slightly to 16.6 percent, still good for the Top 20 in the conference. He also shows excellent range as a rebounder, routinely securing contested boards. According to CBB Analytics, Riley averaged 5.0 rebounds per 40 minutes on missed field goals (excluding free throws), the highest among USF’s rotation players and ranking in the 92nd percentile nationally.

There’s some dissonance that comes with evaluating Riley. He wasn’t a stocks machine as a freshman, which is a bit of a surprise. His steals and blocks numbers — 2.4 percent steal rate and 1.4 percent block rate — aren’t bad, but they seem to undersell his potential as an event creator, especially around the basket. He has a good sense for when to rotate to the rim as a back-line protector, and he displays positive defensive interior principles, including two-handed verticality.

Add in his straight-line speed and springy leaping ability, and Riley can cover a lot of ground while making an impact around the basket.

In this sequence, Santa Clara runs a 5-out action with a slot handoff between center Christoph Tilly (now at Ohio State) and wing Adama Bal. The 6-foot-7 Bal turns the corner on Thomas; with the center pulled away, there’s no immediate rim protection. Bal’s drive for an easy layup is thwarted, however, as Riley rotates from the weak-side corner, reaches the opposite side of the basket and pins the would-be high-percentage shot on the glass.

Even when Riley makes a misstep and must snap into Recovery Mode, he has the length and short-area quickness to get back into the action and make a play.

Factor in more experience, added strength and extra film study, it’s reasonable to expect Riley to surpass 12 blocks this season. The flashes are certainly there in terms of his upside as a defensive playmaker.

Further away from the hoop, Riley can be a disruptive presence as a closeout defender. While he doesn’t always perfectly contain catch-and-go drives, when he fully commits on a closeout, he can turn seemingly wide-open catch-and-shoot opportunities into contested, less comfortable shots.

Riley is at his most advanced defensively when operating as a gap defender — whether zoning up to limit the offense’s advantage or acting as a deterrent in driving and passing lanes.

On this possession, Riley ideally would have his arms out wide, creating a larger presence in the gap as he helps on Tully’s short roll, stunting down from the left wing. But when Tully tries to kick out to Tyeree Bryan (now at Texas Tech), Riley flashes his anticipation and quickness, jumping into the passing lane for a pick-six steal and score.

Initially on this screen-roll possession against Saint Louis, Riley starts gapped up on the backside. As the ball handler approaches, he shifts into a denial stance in the passing lane, with his assignment positioned in the strong-side corner. When Isaiah Swope tries to kick out to a relocating teammate on the wing, Riley is all over it, smothering the passing lane and deflecting the ball for another scoop-and-score.

Riley’s ability to create turnovers is a key part of his transition game, another standout feature of his skill set. According to CBB Analytics, 21.2 percent of his field goal attempts came in transition (90th percentile), where he shot 66.7 percent on 2-point attempts (63rd percentile).

Trailing in the second half of a one-possession game, San Francisco’s transition defense faces a dangerous situation: imbalanced and with no real rim protection in place as Gonzaga’s vaunted fast break races down the court. The Bulldogs have everything they want: Ryan Nembhard, an NBA-caliber point guard, pushing the pace as Graham Ike (61.8 2P%) runs the rim. Riley, however, disrupts the play entirely — establishing the point of attack on Nembhard, then snapping into the passing lane to deflect the ball and create a turnover.

Making a Point

While Riley showed that he has the ability to be a game-wrecker in gaps and on the back-side of the defense, USF will also use him as an on-ball matchup piece — putting Riley on the toughest opposing perimeter option, including lead guard creators. Due to his length, Riley can be a nuisance here for opposing ball handlers, using his arms and hands to apply pressure or contests in rearview pursuit.

Riley doesn’t have the most fluid of hips, though, and he can struggle to navigate screens with precision. This tendency causes him to lose touch with his defensive assignment, and when that happens Riley doesn’t always take the most efficient path back to the ball. This caused issues for Riley and occasionally resulted in points or fouls.

Defending against Gonzaga, Riley is set up to “weak” this ball screen and push Ryan Nembhard to drive with his weaker left hand. The initial setup is fine, but Riley gets buried on the other side of Graham Ike’s pick. This gives Nembhard a lane to drive and effectively shields Riley from getting back to the ball, which results in a lightly contested jumper for a pretty good shooter.

Out in space along the perimeter, opposing ball handlers attacked Riley’s feet with crossovers and quick first steps, leaving Riley in the dust and reducing his length advantage. For example: LeJuan Watts (now at Texas Tech) is a really nice player — with good size, skill and finishing ability — but this is too easy as Riley loses leverage and gives up a straight-line drive to the rim.

Does the jumper make a leap?

Stating the obvious: the biggest swing skill for Riley will be his 3-point jumper. Regardless of archetype — whether Riley goes the route of 3-and-D wing or two-way guard with some creation abilities — he’ll need to establish a solid base with his perimeter shot.

As a freshman, Riley shot 32.6 percent from 3-point range (29-of-89 3PA) against Division I opponents. Including USF’s December 2024 win over Cal State Stanislaus — when he went 0-of-1 from beyond the arc — he finished 29-of-90 from deep (32.2 3P%), with 38 percent of his total field-goal attempts coming from 3-point land.

Riley’s shot versatility will be something to monitor this season, too. With an expanded role and another year of development, Riley could show more off-platform shooting. Riley doesn’t need to immediately become an electric shot-maker, but some more simple forms of movement shooting — curling down screens, running off flares or dribble-handoffs in USF’s offense — would be significant.

The in-between wasn’t a strong suit. Riley was just 5-of-20 on 2-point attempts from outside the lane, accounting for just 8.7 percent of his total field goal attempts, per CBB Analytics. Moreover, Riley made just two unassisted 3-pointers last season, which means that 93.1 percent of his triples were assisted, ranking in the 31st percentile nationally.

In terms of his touch indicators, it’s a bit murky as well. Riley can hit a floater, though the process isn’t super fluid. Riley made 73.5 percent of his free throw attempts last season. That’s not a red flag percentage, but it doesn’t necessarily imply some underlying touch trait — at least at this stage.

There’s also a range factor to keep an eye on. Riley shot just 27.9 percent on NBA-range 3-pointers (19-of-68 3PA) last season, per CBB Analytics. Riley’s jumper features a slight dip during the gather phase, which prices in a little more load time to his shot. It’s not glaring, though, and he still displays a high release, along with good wrist snap and a consistent base. Overall, it’s a repeatable process.

San Francisco starts this possession with Riley cutting left to right across the Iverson screens. From there, the Dons look set run Malik Thomas (now at Virginia) off a staggered down screen out of the right corner. This, however, is fluff, designed to occupy the weak-side defenders. Carlton Linguard will spin opposite and look to find Riley on a backdoor cut. When the basket cuts gets covered up, Riley quickly relocates back to the corner and drills a movement 3-pointer over a closeout from the 6-foot-7 Nate Kingz (now at Syracuse).

With another offseason of work, there’s hope that he can both increase his 3-point volume and efficiency. A more streamlined release would go a long way for his approach. If he continues to improve his footwork and shot prep, it’ll also lead to more comfort with off-screen opportunities from deep.

CUT EM IN

This might feel a bit like a cliche, given how often it comes up when evaluating lower-usage wings with questions about their shot or handle, but Riley is an impactful cutter. Whether within the structure of USF’s offense, in random flow or simply by taking what the defense gives him, Riley can serve as a pressure point on the rim in the half court through his movement.

Against Washington State, the Dons run an empty-side pick-and-roll late in the shot clock, with Riley stationed in the weak-side corner. As Ryan Beasley drives into the paint, the low man helps off Riley to contain the ball, leaving Riley with a choice: stay put in the corner and wait for a kick-out, or get moving. Sensing the opportunity, Riley slides along the baseline to open up a passing window for Beasley, who finds him for an easy finish at the rim.

On this possession against Santa Clara, the strong-side corner isn’t emptied out, but it’s another ball screen action in the right third of the floor — with Riley tucked into the weak-side corner. As Marcus Williams turns the corner and pulls in the low-man defender, Riley trails with another cut along the baseline, resulting in a lob dunk.

Clemson puts two on the ball in this middle pick-and-roll action from Beasley, which he attacks by splitting downhill. Beasley’s drives sucks in help defenders and, once more, Riley takes advantage — cutting down the baseline for a lob finish, which he dunks over the 6-foot-11 Viktor Lakhin.

To start this 5-out possession, Riley and Thomas perform a little exchange on the right side of the floor: Riley lifts from the corner to the wing while Thomas cuts down to the corner. As Linguard receives the pass atop the key, Riley remains in motion with a 45-degree cut into the teeth of the defense. Like a tight end running a slant over the middle and finding a seam in the defense, Riley snags the pass in traffic — between two layers of defenders — and is light off his feet for a quick finish.

Scaling Up?

Playing next to veteran guards Malik Thomas (28.7 percent usage) and Marcus Williams (25 percent usage), Riley mostly functioned on offense as an efficient spot-up wing and cutter with limited on-ball responsibilities: 59.5 percent true shooting, 16.2 percent usage rate and 6.6 percent assist rate. When Riley played with both Thomas and Williams at the same time (459 minutes), according to CBB Analytics, he posted a usage rate and assist rate of 15.4 percent and 6.5 percent, respectively. 

In a limited sample sans both Thomas and Williams (61 minutes), Riley’s assist rate jumped to 12.1 percent while his usage hovered at 16 percent.

Regardless of how you slice his minutes from last season, one of the biggest topics to address, for both USF and Riley’s pro development, will be his ability to scale up as an on-ball creator. Riley had moments of connective playmaking last season, making good decision with the ball. There were flashes of slashing ability, too, out of the occasional ball screen or dribble handoff.

It’s partly a byproduct of his role, but 60.9 percent of Riley’s 2-pointers were assisted last season — a rate closer to that of a center. That said, there’s some subtle wiggle to his work as a driver. With his long strides and a little bit of shiftiness, Riley can slink his way into the paint and make stuff happen.

He’s reliant on driving to his left hand, but his high release point allows him to finish over length when contested, including this tough runner over Nolan Hickman and Ike. The high release is a crucial feature for Riley. In lieu of creating big separation with his handle, Riley should be able to shoot over his fair share of perimeter defenders.

He showed some fun shot-making flashes last season, including this effort while working against a switch. Riley gets a little added space when Ike’s left foot lands on his right, causing the big fella to momentarily lose his balance. However, Riley takes advantage of the space, stepping back and going right into his gather for a beautiful high-arching 3-ball.

Thanks to his height and length, Riley can make passes over the top of the defense, making him a tricky initiator to guard in inverted ball screen actions. If a smaller defender shows or hedges in his direction, Riley can simply deliver an outlet pass over the coverage.

On some of his drives, he’s shown quality coordination and awareness as a passer — absorbing contact, drawing a second defender and finding the open teammate.

Riley isn’t the most accurate passer, nor does he always make sound decisions with the ball — at least not yet. He’ll force skip passes that turn into easy interceptions for weak-side defenders or overthrow cutting teammates. Riley’s assist-to-turnover ratio against all opponents (34 games) was just 34-to-33 — or 1.03-to-1 — and he created only 17.4 points per 40 minutes (31st percentile).

Again, some of that has to come with his role and usage last season. He’ll have more opportunities as a sophomore, though that’ll likely come with more defensive attention and game planning pointed in his direction. As such, Riley will need to handle contact better and get more comfortable passing on the move, especially going to his right or when forced to pick up his dribble.

Putting It All Together

At the risk of placing Riley into a box — with just one season of college hoops under his belt — I’m more bullish on his ability to find traction as a prospect in the 3-and-D capacity: defend multiple positions, cause havoc as a help defender, avoid turnovers on offense, move without the ball as a cutter and hit open 3-pointers.

That doesn’t mean there isn’t another gear for Riley to hit offensively. There are obvious growth areas, and he’s shown flashes of impactful scoring from the wing, with some self-created offense. If he’s able to scale up his on-ball opportunities, drill a few more 3-pointers and continue to provide punch as a help defender, Riley forms the outline of a prospect that can translate to the NBA and stick in rotations for a long time.

Defense, positional size and efficient scoring, with room for growth. There’s work to be done, but the archetype is there for Tyrone Riley.

The post Sophomore Spotlight: Is Tyrone Riley ready to make The Leap? appeared first on Swish Theory.

During the 2024–25 season, Veesaar was one of only eight high-major players to make at least 10 three-pointers (16-of-49 3PA), while also posting a block rate of 5.0 percent (6.1 percent) and an assist rate of 10 percent (11 percent). He’s joined on that list by a few 2025 NBA Draft picks, including two early second-round selections: Ryan Kalkbrenner (No. 34) and Johni Broome (No. 35). The group is rounded out by promising 2026 big man prospects JT Toppin (Texas Tech), Nate Bittle (Oregon), Alex Condon (Florida) and Bangot Dak (Colorado).

With his size (7-0, 225 pounds) and skill set, Veesaar fits the profile of a draftable prospect and may be the versatile stretch-big Hubert Davis has been seeking. As basketball continues to self-select for height and evolves schematically — particularly with the rise of five-out offenses, which become more pervasive and nuanced year after year — seven-footers who can pass, shoot, handle in space and provide rim protection are increasingly valuable. These players not only make a significant impact at the college level but also draw attention as pro prospects.

For Veesaar, the opportunity is clear: UNC has a positional need, and there’s a set archetype for him to follow. As the Tar Heels usher in a new era — marked by a revamped front office and a roster fully built by Hubert Davis — Veesaar stands poised to emerge as one of the ACC’s breakout big men. Here’s why.

The Shot

One of the most intriguing aspects of Veesaar’s game — and a key to unlocking his offensive potential — is the development of his jumper, which has become a valuable part of his arsenal.

After attempting just 11 three-pointers in limited minutes as a freshman during the 2022–23 season, Veesaar redshirted in 2023–24 and returned to a larger role in 2024–25 with increased confidence from beyond the arc. He appeared in all 37 games for Arizona, making five starts, and attempted at least one three-pointer in 28 of them. In two of the nine games where he didn’t attempt a three — both early-season non-conference matchups — he logged only three minutes.

Veesaar isn’t a high-volume, quick-trigger, roving seven-foot shooter like Zvonimir Ivisic (10.7 3PA per 100 possessions, 37.6 3P%) at Illinois. Last season, Veesaar attempted just 3.6 threes per 100 possessions. The developmental nature of his jumper still shows at times, too: some attempts come off awkwardly, and he’s occasionally prone to bailing out of his follow-through to chase down a potential offensive rebound.

That said, he’s shown clear progress in this area, and his jumper appears projectable. He has a smooth shooting motion, though he tends to dip and bring the ball down low on his gather. Despite limited lift, Veesaar can get his shot off over contests — largely due to his size and the space he’s typically afforded on the floor.

Adding to his stretch potential, Veesaar can shoot off of slight movement — in pick-and-pop situations or on relocations — and he’s capable of handling difficult catches. He doesn’t need to be spoon-fed perfect spot-up looks with passes delivered right into his shot pocket.

He misses this 3-point attempt on a baseline out-of-bounds play against Texas Tech, but note how fluid the shot is off movement. Veesaar squares his feet and gets into his gather quickly — almost catching Darrion Williams off guard as he rises over a weak contest.

Here against Arizona State, the Wildcats run their “Angle Pop” set, with Veesaar setting a ball screen for KJ Lewis in the right slot. When Veesaar is covered on the initial pop, it triggers backside “Zoom” action: Carter Bryant sets a down screen for Caleb Love, who sprints into a handoff with Veesaar. ASU defends the action well, but when Love swings the ball to Bryant, the freshman forward attacks north-south with a catch-and-go move against Joson Sanon. As Veesaar’s defender slides over to help on the drive, Veesaar relocates from the paint to the left slot. Bryant’s pass is off the mark, but Veesaar scoops it up like a shortstop with a weak ground ball and drills a 3 right over the contest.

It’s still a bit early to firmly attach the “stretch-five” label to Veesaar: he’s made just 19 three-pointers in 66 college games and is a career 69 percent free-throw shooter. Still, there are other positive touch indicators, and the arrow is pointing in the right direction, which is an encouraging sign for his long-term pro potential and his value within UNC’s secondary and half-court offenses. If he can tighten up a few things around the edges, there’s a good chance he’ll be able to scale up his three-point volume.

That should be of great interest to the Tar Heels. Since the 2007–08 season, UNC has had just one player listed at 6-foot-10 or taller make at least 15 3-pointers in a season: Pete Nance in 2022–23. Coming from Northwestern — a program that incorporates many Princeton-style concepts in its half-court offense — Nance was a skilled offensive 5 who could shoot, initiate dribble-handoffs and pass from the high post. However, during that season, UNC never really found five-out rhythm, as the 6-foot-11 Nance played the majority of his 904 minutes as UNC’s de facto 4-man, next to Armando Bacot: 636 minutes (70.4%), according to CBB Analytics.

(Note: This list excludes tall movement shooters Cameron Johnson and Brady Manek, who were both listed at 6-foot-9 — just below the height threshold. Both easily surpassed the 15 3-pointer benchmark during their seasons at UNC, but they were also primarily used as forwards within UNC’s system. The same is true for the 6-foot-9 Jae’Lyn Withers, who hit 39 3-pointers last season while primarily playing the 4.)

Pick-and-Pop Art: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

It’s a straightforward approach, but one of the most effective ways to unlock Veesaar’s emerging three-point game is through ball screens. With his combination of size and skill, he’s a versatile weapon in these actions — capable of rolling, popping out beyond the arc or short rolling into space. This triple threat should mix in nicely with crafty pick-and-roll guards Kyan Evans and Luka Bogavac. Partnered with Veesaar, these two veteran creators should be able to pressure opponents from multiple levels of the floor, forcing the defense to be mindful of the Estonian’s movements.

When a defense can’t anticipate the movements of the 5 after the screen, it puts all five defenders under pressure. The screen defender must be ready to react to the 5’s movements, while weak-side help defenders are also affected differently, depending on whether it’s a pop or a roll.

On this pick-and-pop possession with Jaden Bradley, Veesaar pops into space as Texas Tech center Federiko Federiko drops into the paint, leaving Veesaar open at the top of the key. Although Veesaar misses the shot, multiple defenders — Federiko and Christian Anderson, who is guarding Love on the weak-side wing — have to rotate and close out on his jumper.

When defenders are forced to rotate and cover this much ground, it opens up numerous opportunities for second-side offense — such as catch-and-shoot 3-pointers off extra passes or basket cuts. Unless there’s a switch, the pop opens up the floor and puts the defense into rotation.

If the weak-side wing defender isn’t ready to stunt or rotate on Veesaar, he can do damage in space, especially when the defense sends two defenders at the ball. For example, Oklahoma State blitzes Bradley on this angled ball screen. Arizona’s spacing is crucial as Veesaar pops to the middle of the floor. With Love as the only spacer on that side and two defenders on the ball, the lone potential help defender — Jamyron Keller — is put in a difficult position: either dig or stunt toward Veesaar, or help off Love and leave a dangerous shooter open in the corner.

Defending in denial with his back to the ball and a hand in the passing lane, Kelly seemingly doesn’t see or react to Veesaar until it’s far too late. While you’d like to see Veesaar finish more forcefully through contact, he puts the ball on the deck twice — with no immediate help defender in his grill — and draws a shooting foul at the rim.

Veesaar’s activity as a pick-and-pop target also makes him a fulcrum for moving the ball side to side. With his ability to bend pick-and-roll coverages and handle the ball along the perimeter, he can be an impactful DHO big while creating opportunities for second-side action. This forces the defense to cover more ground and navigate multiple rounds of screen-roll/pop coverages.

Houston is one of the premier defenses in the country, known for aggressively defending ball screens — often hard hedging the 5, JoJo Tugler, above the level of the screen. Here, Arizona runs the Angle Pop with backside “Zoom” action. Watch Tugler, who must hedge well above the arc on the right wing to contain Bradley, while Veesaar pops to the middle. As soon as Bradley passes to Veesaar, it triggers the Zoom action: Bryant sets a down screen for Love, who runs into the DHO with Veesaar. This forces Tugler to sprint from the right wing to defend a second action — this time against Love coming off the ball screen with some advantage.

Tugler trips on Veesaar’s second screen, and Love has a rare straight-line drive to the rim against Houston’s defense.

On this possession, Veesaar sets another slot ball screen — this time on the left side of the floor — and pops to the middle. Instead of backside Zoom action, Arizona runs Anthony Dell’Orso on a 45-degree cut; if he’s open, Veesaar can hit him on the basket cut. Oklahoma State covers the cut and denies the handoff to Love, who’s lifting out of the right corner. Dell’Orso then sprints back toward Veesaar, and the two initiate an empty-side pick-and-roll. This time, Veesaar dives to the rim, and after what’s essentially his third screen of the possession, he’s able to slip in for a layup on the roll.

While there are some automatic actions in place, this kind of activity allows skilled players to read and react off one another, and it’s made possible by the offense’s 5-out flexibility. Once again, it’s Veesaar popping into space and initiating second-side action that helps create a high-percentage finish.

Pick-and-pops also create opportunities for Veesaar to operate as a passer, another key development pathway. On this possession, Duke hard hedges the empty-side ball screen for Love — a tactic the Blue Devils used in both of matchups with Arizona last season. Veesaar pops open near the right slot, forcing Cooper Flagg to rotate over and switch behind the play, which leaves Townsend open in the right dunker spot after a baseline cut. As Patrick Ngonga scrambles to recover to Townsend, Sion James peels in from the weak-side corner to provide help at the rim. Townsend skips the ball to Bradley in the corner, who attacks Knueppel off the catch for a paint finish.

Duke defends this well, but Arizona moves and attacks with purpose, capitalizing on the initial advantage created by Love and Veesaar through the pick-and-pop and cut pass.

Passing and Playmaking

Veesaar isn’t necessarily a 5-out passing hub — the kind of frontcourt playmaker an offense wants touching the ball at the high post and making decisions every other trip down the floor. However, he showed notable improvement as a redshirt sophomore, making better decisions with the ball. His turnover rate dropped to 15.4 percent (down from 20.4 percent as a freshman), even as his usage climbed to 20.1 percent. Veesaar also finished the season with a slightly positive assist-to-turnover ratio of 1.12-to-1, which is solid enough — at this stage — for a 7-footer who finishes well at the rim, crashes the offensive glass and offers some stretch.

Arizona ran some sets through Veesaar at the high post last season, allowing him to make reads with the ball. In this sequence against Arizona State, the Wildcats run a “Stack Out” action, with Love popping to the left wing. Lewis cuts along the baseline from left to right, clearing that side of the floor. It looks like Arizona is setting up an empty-side DHO between Love and Veesaar. With the defense leaning in that direction, Love counters and darts backdoor as Veesaar finds him for a layup.

Veesaar showed he can make plays as a high-post passer even when the offense goes off script. Texas Tech contains this initial empty-side action between Love and Veesaar, forcing the ball to swing to Bradley on the second side. As that happens, Veesaar lifts to the top of the key. Dell’Orso cuts from the left wing into the paint, and his defender, Kerwin Walton, momentarily loses track of him. For a brief moment, Dell’Orso is open in the left dunker spot and Veesaar capitalizes with a quick pass for an easy layup.

The added spacing and playmaking Veesaar brings should benefit all of UNC’s guards. Evans is a talented off-ball mover and shooter who connected on 44.6 percent of his 3-point attempts last season while playing alongside Nique Clifford in Colorado State’s sophisticated offense. He’ll find opportunities to step into open catch-and-shoot looks off Veesaar’s actions. The same goes for Virginia Tech transfer Jadon Young.

The player who may benefit most from Veesaar’s presence, though, is Seth Trimble. A high-level athlete and talented interior finisher for a 6-foot-3 guard, Trimble has struggled to space the floor; he’s a career 29.8 percent shooter from beyond the arc on 3.9 attempts per 100 possessions. By UNC’s lofty efficiency standards, that lack of a jumper created some challenging half-court fits alongside Elliot Cadeau, another guard with an inconsistent outside shot, especially when paired with two non-shooters at the 4 and 5.

Unsurprisingly, UNC’s offense operated much more efficiently down the stretch last season when Withers emerged as a stretch-4, helping to open up the half-court. Over the final 10 games, Withers shot 45.7 percent from deep (21-of-46 3PA), and the Tar Heels scored 124.1 points per 100 possessions in the 210 minutes he was on the floor. Trimble also benefited: in 609 minutes with Withers on the court, he shot 51.7 percent on two-point attempts, compared to just 46.7 percent when Withers was on the bench.

Veesaar’s added shooting, passing and 5-out ball-handling could have a similar effect — pulling opposing centers away from the paint and opening up cutting lanes and driving opportunities, including off second-side dribble handoffs. With Veesaar on the floor last season, Arizona shot 69.3 percent at the rim (95th percentile), with 38.7 percent of its field goal attempts coming at the basket (94th percentile), according to CBB Analytics.

Interior Finishing

While the pick-and-pop aspect of Veesaar’s game is an intriguing next step in unlocking his full potential, rim runs remain his primary post-screen pattern — rolling downhill toward the basket. Veesaar isn’t an elite vertical athlete, but his length and touch around the rim allow him to finish effectively. He carries solid roll gravity thanks to his size, mobility and willingness to dive hard to the cup, where he does the majority of his damage.

Arizona runs a “Wide” action on this possession, with Veesaar setting the initial off-ball screen for Love, followed by a quick re-screen on the ball. Baylor switches the action, leaving 6-foot Jeremy Roach to guard Veesaar as he rolls to the basket. Love throws a pass over the top, allowing Veesaar to easily high-point the ball against the smaller Roach. Veesaar does well to keep the ball above his chest and finishes through contact for the and-one.

Veesaar drew 2.1 shooting fouls per 40 minutes last season, too.

Duke defends the initial “Spain” pick-and-roll action well, with Tyrese Proctor and James nailing the guard-to-guard switch, while Ngongba retreats to the paint to cover Veesaar’s dive. Veesaar shows his activity level, immediately resetting as Bradley initiates a spread pick-and-roll. Veesaar lifts for his second ball screen of the possession. Ngongba drops into the paint again as Veesaar rolls. Bradley turns the corner and forces a decision: should Ngongba commit to the ball handler and contest the finish, or stay home on Veesaar’s roll? It’s a delicate balance but Ngongba leaves his feet, and Bradley lofts a nifty lob to Veesaar, who shows off his catch radius — snagging the pass out of the air and flushing it.

Kon Knueppel, defending KJ Lewis on the wing, probably should’ve pinched in to tag Veesaar on the roll, especially given Lewis’s limited 3-point gravity. Regardless, it’s a strong possession from Veesaar.

According to CBB Analytics, Veesaar shot 76.9 percent at the rim last season, attempting 6.7 shots at the rim per 40 minutes (58.3 percent of his FGA). He also finished third among Big 12 players with 55 dunks (2.9 per 40 minutes), behind only Aziz Bandaogo and Dillon Mitchell of Cincinnati.

When rolling to the rim or cutting around the basket, Veesaar is a reliable target. His hands aren’t the softest — occasional bobbles happen — but they’re solid overall. Guards can trust him to handle passes in traffic.

This pass from Lewis is behind Veesaar, and there’s a bit of friendly-fire contact as Townsend ducks in near the restricted area. Still, Veesaar manages to pluck the ball out of the air and showcase his footwork and touch — spinning quickly for the finish without ever putting the ball on the floor.

He’ll also be an important pressure point at the rim in UNC’s secondary actions. Veesaar can operate as a trailer, thanks to his shooting touch and ball-handling, but he also runs the floor well for a big — and he’s capable of the occasional acrobatic finish.

This is solid complementary basketball from Veesaar, who shifts from quality rim deterrence — with a well-timed block — to sprinting the seam in transition. These end-to-end runs from the big fella could pair nicely with the open-court passing of freshman forward Caleb Wilson, one of the top 2026 Draft prospects.

Whether it’s in transition, the pick-and-roll or on quick interior passes, Wilson and Veesaar project as an impactful duo with room to grow as their chemistry develops.

Big Role for the Short Roll

Beyond rim runs and pick-and-pops, Veesaar is also comfortable operating in pockets of space between the rim and the arc — particularly on the short roll. When defenses put two on the ball, pick-and-roll operators can confidently hit Veesaar in these tight windows, knowing he has the touch and awareness to make plays. This will be especially useful for Evans and Bogavac, who can hit the eject button and find Veesaar on the short roll when screen-roll coverage extends above the level of the pick.

On this possession against Texas Tech, Arizona runs an empty-corner screen-roll with Love and Veesaar. Toppin hedges the screen, leaving Veesaar open in the short corner. Veesaar is decisive — attacking in space with a single dribble and powering to the rim before the Big 12 Player of the Year can recover.

Veesaar also flashes touch from just beyond the restricted area — a skill he puts to use on both post-ups and short rolls. On this possession against Baylor’s zone, he sets a screen for Lewis, then short rolls into the middle of the lane. After receiving the pass, he rises and finishes over a contest — an impressive display of touch on a difficult shot.

Per CBB Analytics, Veesaar shot 47.1 percent last season on 2-point attempts inside the paint but not at the rim.

When the defense rotates to the back side and gets in front of Veesaar’s short roll, he has shown comfort as a distributor as well. In the Big 12 Tournament, Veesaar sets an empty-side ball screen for Love, prompting Houston to trap with two defenders: Tugler leaps out at Love, leaving Veesaar open in space. Love outlets to Veesaar, who puts the ball on the floor, reads Emanuel Sharp rotating down to the paint and skips a pass to Bradley in the weak-side corner. Veesaar could’ve been whistled for a charge on this play, but his pass to Bradley sets up a swing-swing to Bryant for an open 3. Credit Veesaar with the hockey assist.

In a similar setup against Duke, Veesaar initiates a step-up empty-side screen for Dell’Orso as Maliq Brown hedges the pick. Dell’Orso finds Veesaar in space while Flagg gambles for a steal, leaving the Blue Devils vulnerable on the backside — even as Brown recovers. Veesaar dribbles twice into a congested paint before kicking out to an open Bryant for a corner 3-point attempt.

Again, it’s pretty basic big man stuff, but the decision-making is crisp enough to keep the offense humming and generate open spot-up 3-point looks.

Athleticism, Rebounding and Putback Finishing

For a player his size, Veesaar moves well, using long strides and fluid hips to cover ground effectively. He plays with a wide base and a high level of physicality, consistently sacrificing his body in the paint and working hard to box out for rebounds. While this aggressive style occasionally lands him in foul trouble (5.2 fouls committed per 40 minutes last season), it also makes him a relentless force on the offensive glass, where he’s tough to contain.

Veesaar ranked among the top 100 nationally with an offensive rebound rate of 12.3 percent last season. He converted many of those offensive boards into points, shooting 78.4 percent on putback attempts, according to CBB Analytics. Though not exceptionally springy, Veesaar isn’t ground and his feel around the rim allows him to extend for finishes.

Despite his size, wide base and physicality, Veesaar can still be outmuscled in the paint. He’s not a traditional low-post bruiser and doesn’t particularly stand out on the defensive glass, posting just a 14.5 percent defensive rebound rate for his career. According to Bart Torvik’s database, he was one of only five qualified Division I 7-footers last season with a defensive rebound rate below 15 percent.

Some of Veesaar’s rebounding limitations may stem from Arizona’s defensive scheme, which often had him hedging ball screens on the perimeter rather than sagging in the paint. But part of it also comes down to physical tools: opponents frequently beat him off the floor and exploited his positioning. Whether due to a lack of quick-twitch explosiveness, slower reactions or being pinned in weaker rebounding positions by stronger players, Veesaar can get outmatched on the glass.

Veesaar does a nice job of helping corral the curl here, but he gets pushed under the basket as the ball caroms over his head, leading to an offensive rebound and a second-chance scoring opportunity for Texas Tech.

That said, Arizona still rebounded well with Veesaar on the floor. Even in lineups without Tobe Awaka — Arizona’s top defensive rebounder — units featuring Veesaar as the lone big pulled down 71.3 percent of available defensive rebounds, according to CBB Analytics, a solid team outcome.

Pick-and-Roll Defense: Where’s the Versatility?

Veesaar has enough mobility to defend ball screens in multiple ways, though he’s likely better suited for a more conservative approach, which he’ll find at UNC. In the Arizona games I charted from the 2024–25 season, the Wildcats varied their coverages, but Veesaar was primarily positioned to hedge at the screen. He can do well in this type of scheme, too. For a 7-footer, he moves well laterally with fluid hips.

Under Davis, UNC has primarily defended ball screens with a no-middle approach: downing ball screens when the pick takes place on the outer thirds or the floor, “weaking” ball handlers and forcing them to drive left with their weaker hand, and often dropping the 5 below the level of the screen. With a different scheme, Veesaar will get to showcase some of his defensive versatility.

While there have been limitations and moments of unease, this approach offers several statistical advantages: it protects the paint, limits rim attempts and reduces kick-out opportunities for open 3s. It’s mostly been effective, too: North Carolina has posted a top-50 defense in all four years since Davis took over from Roy Williams.

The high-water mark came two seasons ago, when the Tar Heels outperformed expectations on defense and finished eighth nationally in adjusted defensive efficiency, according to KenPom. That defense didn’t feature standout individual defenders, but UNC found success through collective synergy and adherence to its core concepts. (There was likely some shooting luck involved as well, with opponents hitting just 32.1 percent of their 3-point attempts against North Carolina.)

Assuming UNC maintains this approach as its base, Veesaar has the size, feel and mobility to excel within these coverages. In fact, this is where he’s likely best suited. With his 7-foot frame, he can be a strong deterrent in the paint, taking up space and protecting the rim. His impact is further amplified by the presence of Wilson, who can disrupt as a gap defender.

Here, Veesaar effectively navigates the middle ground of drop coverage, staying in front of the ball handler and sliding into the paint to contain and block Toppin’s short roll attempt.

Rim Protection

As a backline rim protector, Veesaar isn’t elite, but he remains impactful. He may not cover vast ground or dominate games by blocking shots above the rim, but he has a strong motor and is willing to use every inch of his length. Furthermore, Veesaar uses his hands effectively, often keeping them high and well-positioned to challenge shots.

Despite a lack of vertical explosiveness and somewhat slower reaction and anticipation times, there are reasons to view him as an effective anchor — at least at the college level — and a prospect with defensive potential. During his time in Tucson, Veesaar averaged 3.1 blocks per 100 possessions. In the 2024–25 season, Arizona posted a block rate of 14.2 percent with Veesaar on the floor (94th percentile), which dipped to 10.1 percent in minutes without him, per CBB Analytics.

Whether playing with the Estonia national program, Real Madrid or Arizona, it’s clear that Veesaar has been taught to play with verticality and contest shots at the rim using two hands straight up. This form of backline rim protection will be crucial for UNC next season — defending the basket without fouling. The Tar Heels are a bit thin at center behind Veesaar, so Davis will need to rely on him for significant minutes this season.

In the late stages of the Sweet 16 game against Duke, the Blue Devils run a Flagg-Knueppel screen-roll to force a switch — taking Bryant off Flagg and putting Dell’Orso, a significantly weaker defender, on the No. 1 pick. Flagg glides past Dell’Orso, but his shot is disrupted by Veesaar, who slides over and times his contest perfectly — absorbing Flagg’s left shoulder and keeping both arms vertical to challenge the shot as Flagg hangs in the air.

Opponents shot just 58.3 percent at the rim with Veesaar on the floor last season, and that number dropped even further to 50.2 percent (99th percentile) in lineups where Veesaar was the lone big (sans Awaka), according to CBB Analytics. In 599 minutes with those lineups, Arizona allowed just 100.6 points per 100 possessions.

If Veesaar can maintain a similar level of production while limiting fouls and playing more minutes in UNC’s system, he’ll provide a stable foundation for the team’s half-court defense and further solidify his prospect status.

Putting It All Together

Henri Veesaar isn’t just a developmental curiosity or a stretch-big project. He’s a system-enhancing big man with experience, plus the tools to impact games at both ends of the floor and elevate the ceiling of UNC’s evolving roster.

At seven-feet tall, with mobility, stretch potential, some rim protection skills and improving feel as a passer, Veesaar checks the boxes of a modern, scalable frontcourt piece.

If he continues to increase his 3-point volume, stay out of foul trouble and remain a reliable interior presence, Veesaar has the chance to be more than just a breakout big in the ACC. He could emerge as a central figure in UNC’s success and solidify his standing as a draftable prospect in 2026.

The post Summer Sleepers: Henri Veesaar appeared first on Swish Theory.