Cover image by Ross Pinsler.

Tyler Tanner, by Lukas Spinnler

One of the many beauties of basketball, to me, lies in the coexistence of era-specific trends and its overarching principles. Whether we look at the 1950s or the modern game, the holistic approach to basketball remains largely unchanged. Teams still need lineups that can score efficiently, rebound effectively, and handle and distribute the ball without committing turnovers.

Traditionally, ball-handling responsibilities have been assigned to the point guard—the smallest and usually most skilled player on the floor. In recent years, however, we have seen a shift away from smaller point guards toward maximizing size across all positions, alongside a rising baseline of skill throughout the league.

In 2006, 26 players stood 6’1″ or under and logged at least 750 minutes in the league. Twenty years later, that number has dropped to just 15 players. As with many recent trends, this feels like an overcorrection to me. Smaller guards can still be highly impactful NBA players.

Let’s start with the commonly cited counterarguments against small guards: with the rise of point forwards, the “traditional” point guard has become obsolete, and it is more valuable to fill out guard positions with size. While there is some truth to this, the actual number of forwards capable of handling a significant on-ball load in the half-court is lower than it might initially appear.

Much of the value provided by ball-handling forwards comes in transition rather than in structured half-court offense. Even NBA All-Stars like Jalen Johnson and Deni Avdija have below-league-average efficiency in half-court situations currently, often accompanied by elevated scoring turnover rates.

There are also inherent physical challenges: at 6’8″ or taller, it is simply more difficult to maintain a low, controlled dribble and consistently access high-value areas of the court compared to smaller players.

Even the apex of this archetype, LeBron James, didn’t have half-court creation seasons quite up to par with other ATG perimeter creators; it was his transition play that made him one of the best offensive players ever.

Having smaller ball-handling options is not a redundant feature within a team; in fact, it should be a highly additive element to a team’s global offense.

The most intuitive argument against small guards is that their lack of size hurts teams defensively. Smaller guards typically struggle to rebound and are more likely to be targeted in high-leverage situations, which can lead to diminishing defensive returns. These are, in fact, the natural trade-offs that come with less size, and the numbers tend to support this.

There is a positive correlation between height and both dTS and dREB influence according to timedecay RAPM. Smaller players generally have the least impactful contests and don’t provide a lot of resistance at the rim for opposing players. 

Conversely, this same tradeoff applies to a different facet of the game: small guards positively influence their team’s turnover economy on both ends of the floor.

Because this position carries the highest overall skill threshold and operates closest to the ground, smaller players are often exceptional at limiting their team’s turnovers while also generating them on the defensive end.

Moreover, the best teams in the league are placing greater emphasis than ever on winning the turnover battle as a way to gain a competitive edge, the perfect breeding ground for the resurgence of the small guard.

In 2016, the correlation between offensive turnover rate (oTOV) and offensive rating (ORtg) was r = 0.25, while the correlation between defensive turnover rate (dTOV) and defensive rating (DRtg) stood at r = 0.16. Fast forward ten years, and these figures have risen to 0.48 and 0.43, respectively, clearly illustrating the growing emphasis on turnover economy by successful teams.

So, how is this relevant for draft evaluations? The stylistic advantages that small guards provide remain extremely valuable and are perhaps even more sought after today than ever before, but they come with an important caveat. The “classic” point guard who neither rebounds nor holds up defensively is likely to be a net negative in the long run. Instead, teams should prioritize prospects who excel in traditional point guard skills while also simulating size.

A study conducted by our dear friend Colton last season supports this idea: the key differentiator between successful and unsuccessful guard prospects in the league is not traditional guard skills alone, but rather skills typically associated with other positions such as rebounding, shot-blocking, efficient two-point scoring, and drawing fouls.

Having a high TRB%, BLK%, or 2P% and free-throw rate allows a player to “play bigger” than their listed size and aligns their statistical footprint more closely with that of taller players, an essential factor given the thin margins for smaller prospects. Identifying these players is where true margin wins are made, and where the future of the point guard position likely lies. This heuristic perfectly applies to Vanderbilt guard Tyler Tanner.

Let’s address the elephant in the room first: Tyler Tanner is small. He measured in at around 6’0″ in shoes with a 6’4″ wingspan and 167 lb, which would make him one of the smallest players in the league. Under normal circumstances, I would agree with the general consensus that investing valuable draft capital in undersized guards is a risky proposition. However, Tanner presents a different case. He not only excels in the inherent strengths of small point guards but also simulates size as well as any 6’0″ player in recent memory.

Returning to the core advantages of smaller guards outlined earlier- positive turnover influence on both ends and elevated skill thresholds that translate into superior touch and ball-handling- Tanner stands out clearly. Over the course of his career, he has posted a 4.4 STL% and a 3.3 assist-to-turnover ratio. This points to one of the most cerebral players in the country, a notion that is consistently supported by the film.

Tanner is not an especially flashy passer, but he frequently makes the correct read. In many ways, he embodies the prototype of a traditional point guard: organizing the offense, initiating sets, and getting his teammates involved without sacrificing ball security. When his backcourt partner Duke Miles was off the floor, Tanner’s assist percentage jumped to 36%, with only a marginal increase in turnovers.

He is particularly effective in pick-and-roll situations, where he consistently finds his roll man and leverages his handle to create high-quality opportunities for teammates.

Vanderbilt was in the top 15 in team TO% this year largely due to Tyler’s ability as a ball handler and improved offensive toolkit. Tanner’s relatively low rim assist rate speaks to his overall risk aversion, but a -2% swing in team TO% probably makes this a positive tradeoff. 

He also boasts a pretty impressive handle; Tanner gets low on drives and can access pretty much any area on the court with his small-space coordination and burst, as evidenced by a 7.4 TO% on drives. 

This year he almost doubled (!!!!) his usage and improved his efficiency, all while maintaining elite ancillary production.

Especially Tanner’s touch leap is intriguing: 85 FT% places him in elite company and is more than adequate for a small guard. 

So far, so good. We have established that Tyler Tanner provides all the skills associated with a “classic” PG. He avoids turnovers and playmakes at a high rate with a favourable intersection of FT% and handle, all while forcing turnovers on the other end. These skills have historically been good indicators of NBA success, but there are still plenty of “misses”.

The differentiator between + NBA contributors and overseas pros who also excel at the aforementioned skills is hitting certain thresholds of functional size and athleticism, which will allow you to get on the court and offset the small margins of <6`3 players. In this case, we are looking for applied physicality (DREB%, FTR, 2P%) and verticality (BLK%, dunks).

Among the 10 underclassmen who approximated Tanner’s blend of cognition and touch, he ranks 5th in DREB%, 3rd in FTR, 3rd in 2P%, 3rd in BLK%, and first in total dunks. 

Tanner’s ability to play bigger than his size is what truly sets him apart. Recording 15+ dunks in a single season is impressive for any guard, let alone one standing at 6’0″. His vertical explosiveness is genuinely unique in that regard.

He converted 64% of his attempts at the rim this year (58% in the half court), alongside a 46 FTR, both of which point to an unusual level of physicality for a player of his size. Unlike many smaller guards, Tanner does not shy away from contact. Instead, he embraces it, using his vertical pop to generate separation and create better finishing angles.

He does get blocked a fair amount of times simply due to his size, but not shying away from contact at the rim is overall a net positive, one of the main reasons for his robust FTR. 

This also leads me into my main issue with Tanner, though: simulating size is valuable, but it’s not the same as actually possessing it. Tanner’s scoring profile is incongruent with his anthropometric profile. 

Tanner posted a 1.7 rim:non-rim ratio alongside a 35 3PAR on the season. While prioritizing rim attempts is not inherently problematic, it may not be sustainable at the next level. Most sub-6’1″ players who find offensive success in the NBA tend to be more rim-averse, instead leaning on floaters, midrange scoring, or high three-point volume to compensate for their physical limitations.

To his credit, Tanner has improved as a three-point shooter; his mechanics are pretty quick, and his overall shot diet of 3s seems to be pretty deep, indicating comfort from the NBA 3pt line.

However, his overall volume remains relatively low (7.7 3PA per 100 possessions), and he attempted fewer pull-up threes than most of his peers, a near prerequisite for primary on-ball guards at the next level. Only 32% of his threes are unassisted, a figure more typical of a wing than lead guard. 

He has converted 38% of his non-rim 2s this year, and, especially in the beginning of the year, it was clear that he felt uncomfortable falling back on midrange counters when cut off. Especially on runners, he experienced trouble organizing his feet, resulting in awkward misses.

As the year went on, though, Tanner grew noticeably more comfortable in his floater, an encouraging development.

In his first 26 games, Tanner had a floater frequency of 11.8% while only converting 17.5% of them; in his last 10 games, he sits at a 12.9% Frequency and 47.1% FG%. A positive trend in a fairly small sample. 

Defensively, Tanner’s anticipation and hand-eye coordination really stand out. He generates steals and deflections both on and off the ball with quick hands and timely rotations.

His foot speed also allows him to hold up reasonably well against drives, and he has shown the ability to navigate screens effectively when chasing opposing guards.

That said, Tanner’s lack of size, particularly his frame and strength, does show up in certain situations, leading to ineffective contests and easier scoring opportunities for opponents. The best small guard defenders tend to be stronger and more physically developed than Tyler currently is, making strength development a clear priority moving forward.

Ultimately, Tyler Tanner has a generational intersection of traits. His cognition paired with his athleticism is a highly unique baseline on its own, paired with superb free throw shooting and a high degree of physicality, with above-average DREB, FTR and 2P%. On the other hand, it remains a question whether his body and shot process will allow him to maximise these traits. He’s pretty light and doesn’t have a long wingspan while having a poor shot diet for his specific mold. Low 3pr and poor floater conversion/rim reliance is a scoring process that is hard to keep up considering below-average WS and BMI, even for his position. I am usually an advocate of these „trait-maxxed“ players, but Tanner’s margins are going to be razor thin. Betting on probable development in terms of shot profile (improved mid-range efficiency in conference play and outlier high ft% are a solid pathway to 40+ 3pr and a more balanced offensive approach) and strength gain could work, but the downside is high. Nonetheless, I remain much higher than consensus on Tanner, and expect him to return top 10 value in his eventual draft class. This is a special prospect that should be treated as such.

Chance Mallory, by Elias Reichek

The past NBA season culminated with the (relatively) diminutive Jalen Brunson hoisting the Bill Russell NBA Finals MVP trophy in San Antonio. The Knicks’ sprint to the Finals, captained by one of the league’s smallest warriors, has reignited public and league discourse on the viability of small guards: is Brunson the exception, the only small guard capable of leading a team to a championship? Was Brunson even the most impactful Knicks player over the course of this run? Should teams search for the next Brunson? Is there even a next Brunson?

Such broad, archetypal NBA analysis will always be limited. Consigning a group of players, not classified by style or impact but merely anthros and positionality, to NBA purgatory is an inherently flawed concept. It’s why I’ve been confounded by the recent public doubt about small guards. This lack (and subsequent revival) of confidence in small guards is based on an oscillating perception of a handful of stylistically disparate players. As Luc mentioned, just 15 players shorter than 6’1 logged 750+ minutes last NBA season. The focus of fans and the media on the broad umbrella of small guards overlooks the nuance and richness of different players’ footprints on this beautiful game. Impact should be analyzed with specificity, on a case-by-case basis. 

Modern basketball positionality is best thought of as a spectrum, with cognition+perimeter skill on one end and physicality on the other. Though they aren’t independent of each other–it takes a certain level of spatial processing and awareness to actualize physical tools into functional impact–there’s still a general tradeoff present between the two sides among most players. As players ascend the positional spectrum, more physicality is required, and vice versa with cognition and perimeter skill. 

This brings me to the main concept of this article: small guards can still be viable at the NBA level; they simply have to find ways to mitigate their anthropometric weakness through functional traits. These players, like Tyler Tanner, can escape small guard purgatory (shoutout @100guaranteed for the apt term) by combining real guard-level cognition and skill with the physicality of a bigger player. Production in physically arduous areas (OREB%, DREB%, 2P%, FTR, dunks) despite a vertical disadvantage is crucial because it indicates three things: 1. future, impact-conducive production in these areas; 2. outlier physicality that can be applied to other aspects of the sport (for instance, as a defender vs. mismatch-hunting); and 3. general greater spatial awareness and processing. It takes special ball-tracking and hand-eye coordination for a player who’s 6-foot and below to compete as a rebounder against much larger players. In his latest piece, the brilliant @NileHoops touched on this idea while analyzing Jarred Vanderbilt’s outlier rebounding for his height/weight.

Speaking of a sub-6-footer with special ball-tracking and hand-eye coordination who competes as a rebounder against much larger players, soon-to-be sophomore Virginia guard Chance Mallory stands at 5 ’10 and 186 pounds (!!!). Despite his frame (and maybe because of it too?), I believe he will be a real NBA contributor in the next five years.

Many of the Virginia guard’s strengths parallel Tanner’s, namely his supreme cognition manifested in two-way turnover battle dominance and sustained playmaking impact. Mallory sported a pristine 3.0 A/TO on real usage (~20 USG% and 24 AST%), as well as an eye-popping 4.0 STL%.

The steal rate is especially impressive given the poor 2025-26 UVA dTOV ecosystem, as the Cavaliers were 257th in opponent TO% in the nation! Mallory’s defensive intelligence and activity are remarkable. Watch the ground he covers over the course of this possession against NC State, culminating in a steal:

Mallory’s passing, despite not being rim-heavy (just 37% of his assists were rim assists), had a massive bearing on UVA’s 2pt and rim scoring this past season. Every UVA rotation regular (min% >40) except Johann Grunloh shot significantly better from 2 and at the rim with Mallory on the court this season. It’s also worth noting that out of these regulars, every player except Sam Lewis was substantially more assisted at the rim with Mallory on the court. Mallory’s ability to effectively take on some of the initiation and creation burden made his teammates better 2pt scorers, as he created opportunities for his team to attack tilted defenses.

Mallory had a bevy of impressive passes this season, but my mind has replayed one especially astute dump-off pass versus Louisville, over and over and over again.

The play begins with Johann Grunloh slipping a ball screen for Mallory at the top of the key. Louisville big Sananda Fru does a good job initially recovering from a high drop to a rolling Grunloh. Meanwhile, Mallory cleverly creates space for himself: after his first dribble, Mallory hesitates, causing his defender, Ryan Conwell, to freeze behind him, creating more separation on his drive to the rim. Mallory’s change of pace has all but freed him from Conwell’s point-of-attack defense. Poised to exploit the 2-on-1 advantage he and Grunloh now field against Fru, Mallory begins his gather just outside the restricted area. Just as he’s gathering, the trailing Conwell makes a last-ditch effort to poke the ball free from Mallory’s clutches. Conwell’s poke disrupts Mallory’s gather, causing him to slightly bobble the ball as he begins his takeoff. Mallory’s rhythm is disrupted, and he finds himself midair, smothered by Fru, with basically no angle to finish at the rim. To make matters worse, because of the angle he jumped at, he is no longer facing Grunloh. Mallory seems to be out of options. 

What’s next is pure Mallory Magic: while he’s midair, knowing Grunloh is still lingering behind him, Mallory uses incredible core strength to contort around Fru, pitching the ball to Grunloh just before his feet touch the ground. Mallory’s gifts as a court mapper shone with as incredible a pass as I saw all NCAA season.

It’s been established that both Tanner and Mallory excel as playmakers and off-ball defenders. But where our two favorite small guards differ is in how they ‘simulate size.’ Luc explained how Tanner’s vertical athleticism, represented by his atypical blk%, dunks, and dreb%, should ease many of the zeitgeist’s qualms with his stature. Mallory simulates size too, in his own way. He isn’t the vertical athlete that Tanner is, but he has found ways to leverage his own most unique anthropometric trait: his weight. I led with Mallory’s measurements for a reason: he’s built like a tank. Pairing a low center of gravity with substantial mass and elite spatial processing and awareness leads to an unfathomable rebounding and contact-creation footprint for a supposedly small guard–Mallory notched a 4.4 ORB%, a 12.5 DRB%, and a 55.6 FTR in his freshman year! It cannot be overstated how noteworthy these marks are. A 5’10 guard should not be able to produce like this in high-major basketball.

Mallory had a particularly impressive sequence featuring astounding ball-tracking against Dayton in early December. Mallory, faced with a quasi-switch from Dayton’s big, is able to generate a closeout opportunity for a lifting Dallin Hall, and upon stopping short on his foray to the basket, Hall finds an open Thijs de Ridder in the opposite corner. You might think Mallory’s job is finished in this offensive possession; his first-action creation and gravity led to an open, high-value shot for his teammate. It would be in the best interest of practically every other player his size on the planet to get back on defense here: what more could such a small player do to contribute here? Instead (you could probably sense this coming), Mallory slowly creeps in for the offensive rebound. He times his jump perfectly, somehow winning an aerial duel against 6’6 Dayton guard Keonte Jones, snatching the ball away at the apex of his leap. Then Mallory has the wherewithal to find Hall again, who makes the kickout to Jacari White for a wide-open three. Mallory’s offensive rebounding is a surefire indicator of his unique blend of spatial processing and physicality. While UVA head coach Ryan Odom’s aggressive glass-crashing scheme certainly enhanced Mallory’s offensive rebounding production, his strong AAU priors as a rebounder lead me to believe that his outlier OREB% is not at all system-made. (On the 2023 Under Armor Circuit, Mallory had the second-most total rebounds for a strong Team Thrill, only trailing now-Pelicans forward Derik Queen.)

It’s hard to find historical analogs for Mallory because his profile is so contradictory. How many NCAA players have ever had such a sharply tuned shot diet (48.7 3PR/55.6 FTR and a 2.3 rim:non-rim ratio with guard-level unassistedness!) and robust passing+TOV aversion, while sustaining wing-adjacent offensive rebounding and legitimate havoc creation defensively? When factoring in age and conference, the list is very, very short.

Mallory is seemingly way out of his depth in this query. Yes, Mallory is significantly shorter than his stylistic peers. His lack of verticality is further reflected in his dunks #. I would be whatever the superlative of shocked is if he even dunks the ball once before he leaves college; meanwhile, Pippen, Smart, and Harden all compiled 20+ dunks over their respective NCAA careers. And the NBA trio had all handled nucleus-level usage by Mallory’s age. So what gives?

Even when accounting for the A/TO inflation that’s taken place over the course of the Bart era, Mallory’s turnover aversion is still significantly ahead of the field. Mallory shares a skill intersection with the 21st century’s (arguably) most formative player, one of the decade’s best ancillary talents, and a real rotation guard, while potentially boasting better cognition than all three of them.

My understanding of the term cognition, largely informed by the great work of @100guaranteed, is that it encompasses all forms of functional processing by a player. Any read/decision/action can technically be deciphered as an indicator of a player’s cognition; however, the most iron-clad empirical measures of cognition are heavily associated with guardness (as my positionality spiel entailed). This makes sense: guards have by far the largest processing burden.

 
Both Tanner and Mallory share a special intersection of cognition (manifested in STL%, AST%, and A/TO) and shooting talent in their profiles. When parsing for these qualities, and adjusting for age + conference, we are left with this intriguing list of NCAA seasons:

Why hasn’t Reed Sheppard been able to calcify his ostensible NCAA feel (2.2 A/TO & 4.6 STL%) into NBA-level TOV influence, while the even smaller Fred VanVleet has been dominant in those 2 factors for the better part of a decade?

With just one (ethical!) added filter, we can find Mallory isolated with two of the league’s foremost cognitive talents (VanVleet and Tyrese Haliburton):

Offensive rebounding appears to be another indicator of cognition for guards already sustaining playmaking loads and general perimeter responsibilities.  Offensive rebounding production represents both a baseline level of physicality and a nuanced understanding of space, as well as adept ball-tracking skills.

How these traits shaped the stylistic development of Fred VanVleet fascinates me. VanVleet is particularly relevant when discussing Mallory due to their similar skill intersections and measurements.

My hypothesis is that VanVleet’s acute spatial understanding has allowed him to make dramatic improvements as a volume pull-up 3pt shooter, as he’s able to process and recognize open shooting windows out of pick-and-roll situations extremely quickly. VanVleet’s pullup shooting results in his greatest value-add–his comically unbalanced, pullup 3-heavy shot diet has allowed him to wield some of the sport’s most robust offensive turnover suppression. I suspect that such a dramatic offensive adaptation from the college iterations of his scoring process has been enabled by VanVleet’s advanced cognitive abilities. (Perhaps a similar cognitive trait is responsible for James Harden’s development into one of the greatest pullup shooters the sport has ever seen.) And despite very poor length (just a +2 WS), VanVleet has continued to force defensive turnovers in the league. The same spatial processing and ball-tracking that helped an anthropometrically lacking VanVleet post a 4.4 OREB% in his junior year continues to power his +1.2 dTOV impact (by 6-factor 4y RAPM). 

FVV’s weight and overall engagement have helped him reach neutral+ dTS influence; I believe Mallory can attain mostly similar outcomes if and when given the opportunity on basketball’s biggest stage.

Similar to FVV’s pullup-3 chucking (chucking being used in the most non-derogatory way possible), Haliburton’s exceptional spatial awareness has shown at the NBA level through his own superpower: risk-averse rim passing.

The intersection Mallory shares with these two cognitive basketball greats is extremely powerful: why can’t Mallory develop his own cognitively-linked superpower?

For all of the reasons outlined above, Mallory is likely my favorite long-term basketball prospect on the planet. But he certainly does not come without his flaws. 

The biggest caveat to the Mallory profile is that he is old. You might have caught on to this by noticing I’ve only used U21 and non-senior class/age qualifiers in the queries above. Born in October 2005, Mallory is over a year older than the bulk of his rising sophomore peers. He’s a whopping five months older than Tanner! Age vs production is the paradigm for any and all predictive analysis; Mallory’s significant freshman year production would signal a much higher upside if he were true freshman age. 

My other consequential concern revolves around Mallory’s usage: his impressive two-way profile hasn’t been sufficiently stress-tested. When compared to similarly skilled and productive NBA success stories, Mallory almost always lags behind in either usage or playmaking load. Mallory’s ancillary production was special last season, don’t get me wrong. But producing on the margins while managing 20 USG% and 24 AST% is a completely different thing than maintaining that production on 26 USG% and 28 AST%. The stamina required to sustain ancillary production with a usage bump is insane. The capacity to do so implies even greater ancillary capabilities when scaled down (as almost everyone is in the NBA). This is why Tyler Tanner is so special! Fred VanVleet’s junior season likely belongs on the Mount Rushmore of upperclassmen seasons in the Bart era because of how he was able to soak up usage and simultaneously dominate the margins. Junior year FVV had an era-adjusted 3.7 A/TO on 35 AST%, while forcing defensive turnovers and rebounding on both ends. (Every single time I read over his profile, it becomes even more incomprehensible that he was undrafted.) Accepting such a creation load also usually harms prospects’ shot diet: 3s are a lot harder to create off the bounce vs when spotting up.

Luc clearly outlined what Tanner’s path to NBA impact is: two-way turnover margin dominance. Mallory’s is likely something similar. It’s only fitting that our two favorite small guards fit neatly into a query alongside the NBA king of this mold.

Tanner’s vertical athleticism, shown in dunks, blocks, and 2pt scoring, and superb feel/shooting/physicality indicators explain why many of Draft Twitter’s sharpest analysts are exceedingly high on him (to the dismay of seemingly everyone else). VanVleet’s uniqueness is also spotlighted through this format–his playmaking and turnover aversion should catch your eye. I’m eagerly waiting for Mallory to find a way to distinguish himself from these two titanic statistical profiles. (He might very well be a usage leap away from FVV regen status.)

I feel cautiously optimistic about Mallory’s ability to scale up. Upon the exodus of Virginia’s super-senior guards, Mallory seems poised to take over the starting point guard role next season. His PNR shot diet was encouraging: a .36 3PR/.53 FTR (!!!) scoring process is hopefully a sign of things to come as Mallory’s PNR volume will likely increase next year. Mallory’s contact creation is so vital for his scoring outlook; his FTR dramatically raises his scoring floor, especially given how poor of a 2P scorer he is and projects to be at the next level. There, the anthros are hard to overcome, especially if he continues to operate as a ‘finisher to draw fouls’. (It’s worth noting that in that 2023 Under Armor Circuit sample, Mallory was actually more efficient than the foot-taller Queen on 2s. In 16 games for Team Thrill, Mallory shot 66.2% inside the arc, but with just a .22 FTR.) 

It will be important to monitor how Mallory’s shot diet changes as his creation load presumably rises. His staggering rim:non-rim ratio makes a lot of sense considering his affinity for contact, and also is likely a function of his profile not being stress/usage-tested. Unlike similarly skilled guards, Mallory has not yet been forced to explore non-rim options at this stage of his NCAA career. That might very well change next season.  Mallory’s touch is also better than the indicators from his lone college season would have you believe. He doesn’t have the touch of a 77 FT% shooter. Over considerable pre-NCAA samples, Mallory shot 84% from the line! When factoring in his relatively poor display this season, the total sample still comes out to around 81%. I am confident he will have a better shooting campaign after a mildly disappointing shotmaking year as a freshman.

Basketball is a game featuring some of the largest humans on the planet, and there will always be extremely functional advantages that come with height. Yes, the long-term professional basketball outlooks of both Tanner and Mallory would undoubtedly be more favorable if they were taller. But despite Mallory’s height, his nexus of traits and production is rare enough to bet on, even though the rampant heightism of NBA front offices will probably keep him from an NBA court for at least a couple of years.

The post Simulating Size: Tyler Tanner and Chance Mallory appeared first on Swish Theory.

Swish Theory’s strongest asset is its people. All from different locations, professions, academic backgrounds and rooting for teams across the league, but all thinking critically about the sport they love.

This breadth of diversity makes write-ups like these so functional. So many diverse perspectives in a room limits blind spots, and it also allows us to build our own sort of consensus.

That’s exactly why we turned to thirteen of our best draft experts to answer a simple question: of the players not invited to the NBA Combine, who will have the best NBA career?

Unsurprisingly, the group came up with a wide range of answers. There are a few repeats (Tamin Lipsey was selected three times), but even where there’s overlap, the writers’ reasoning and approach clearly differs. Each of the thirteen responses reflects the writer’s unique evaluatory paradigm.

Enjoy!

Matt Powers – Tucker DeVries, Indiana

An immediate value-source for players is when they have access to what I like to call a nexus point. A nexus point is when a player is in a situation where their abilities unlock a multi-decision point where they can take advantage in multiple ways. When a player gets in that position, the opponent’s defense has to be perfect or else this offensive player is able to get an immediate advantage. Think of AJ Dybantsa getting into his midrange where he can 1.) finish a middie at a good percentage, 2.) use nifty footwork to get to the rim, or 3.) kick out to punish help. This makes it very difficult to have a perfect defensive possession against AJ. Another example would be Tyrese Haliburton in transition, where his ultra-quick processing allows him to find multiple teammates or hit a pull-up three.

Tucker DeVries has access to a nexus point as convenient as anyone in this class. For DeVries, it comes off the catch on the wing. His options are as follows: 1.) take the catch and shoot three if open (46% from three on open looks the last two seasons), 2.) skip the ball if coverage over-loads, or 3.) pull-up if his man blows by or plays tight. That is also the order of effectiveness, as DeVries is a great spot up shooter, good passer and okay pull-up shooter. But it is rare to find this kind of offensive optionality late in the draft.

I’m particularly moved by DeVries’ sense of passing angles in the tape. His assist rate wasn’t sky high, as he didn’t run a lot of pick and roll, but had an elite assist-to-turnover ratio (2.2), validating his quality of decision-making. He is particularly adept skip passing, which forces the defense to stay committed to the opposite-side perimeter, therefore opening up alleys to the basket. His 86% free throw shooting confirms his caliber of shooter, which should translate into good three point gravity in combination with his quick trigger from deep (68 3PAR).

The easy issue to point out is poor athleticism, but DeVries is still 6’6.25’’ and 222 pounds, able to hide on whichever SF/PF is slower, and is high feel enough to keep a defensive shell. We’ve seen other spot up shooters like Baylor Scheierman and Sam Hauser hang in defensively, though both are a bit more agile than DeVries. But Tucker is stronger than both, and has equal if not better feel. That size locks in his passing value as well, able to find angles that your average spot up guard cannot.

Tucker DeVries seems like a potential spot starter in an upside case, a reliable spacer who won’t make any glaring errors. Drafting a player in the late second, or signing as an UDFA, who can provide this clearcut of offensive value should be a boon to whoever snags him.

Joseph George- Tamin Lipsey, Iowa State

Maybe I’m copping out a bit by choosing Lipsey, who absolutely should have been invited to the NBA Combine after yet another monstrous defensive season for Iowa State. But then again, a player feeling like a cop-out answer does reflect extremely positively on them.

Lipsey basically hits on all the feel indicators: he’s now put up three college seasons with a steal percentage over 4.0%, and combines his turnover generation with ball security on the other end. Of course, Lipsey fits very neatly into the type of prospect that has gotten little shine in the pre-draft process but ends up surprising doubters. The intersection of high-major guards who are sub-6’4″, have a steal rate north of 3.8%, an AST/TO above 2.8, and logged real rotation minutes is actually surprisingly small. Among those thirteen players are Fred VanVleet, T.J. McConnell, Jamal Shead, Reece Beekman, Tyler Ennis, and Jacob Gilyard. Of course, it’s not guaranteed Lipsey achieves these outcomes, but the pathway is certainly there for real rotation value.

I often try to frame my evaluations in terms of projected six-factor RAPM, because it helps me isolate which traits actually move the needle for teams. The framework decomposes a player’s impact into six channels, three on each end: scoring efficiency, turnovers, and rebounding for offense (oTS, oTOV, oREB) and their defensive mirrors (dTS, dTOV, dREB). Lipsey grades out positively in several of them. His ball pressure and turnover generation should drive strong dTOV value, his ball security shows up in oTOV, and his work on the glass will give him a positive oREB despite his size.

Of course, the bear case for Lipsey isn’t something that doesn’t matter: his scoring efficiency is below average and has not shown a lot of development. But is Lipsey really as bad a scorer as the broader efficiency metrics would suggest? Perhaps not. His unassisted shot diet actually looks somewhat encouraging – 83% of his shots at the rim are self-created, and he’s somewhat comfortable pulling up in the midrange, even at modest efficiency.

I acknowledge his profile is unconventional, but jagged prospects with good, tangible feel are often great value bets, especially when they’ve maintained this type of production over multiple seasons. I think that should warrant Lipsey a second look as we get closer to draft day.

Lukas Spinnler – Nate Bittle, Oregon

Playing four years at Oregon, Bittle has a number of damning flaws for a center that should theoretically disqualify him from NBA conversations. He has a low dunk frequency (9 total dunks on the season), nor does he efficiently score inside the arc or grab offensive rebounds at rates consistent with NBA caliber big men.

Paradoxically, these weaknesses may actually open up a more intriguing, indirect pathway for Bittle as the league’s next great “Wing Center.“

The blueprint for his archetype is Jaylin Williams of the Oklahoma City Thunder. Williams functions as a big on defense via defensive rebounding influence and rim deterrence, while mimicking the three-point rate and assist rate of a wing. In this way, he alleviates the limited two-point and offensive rebounding influence typically associated with center-sized players. Strength in these isolated skills has willed Jay-Will to a top 80 placement in time-decay RAPM, offering compelling evidence that this mold can be an absolute lineup construction cheat code.

The traits needed to replicate this impact are a high level of cognition alongside shooting volume and a baseline of big skills. Bittle appears well on his way. Since 2008, there has been just one drafted player over 6’6 to hit the following thresholds: 5 dunks, 17 DREB%, 1.6 STL%, and 8 3PA/100. That player would be Sixers forward Paul George. If drafted, Bittle would be second player to qualify. To do this while being a true 7 footer is truly outlier.

Nate won‘t have the same DREB influence that Jaylin has provided, but he does projecs as a much better rim protector. He offers strong rim protection metrics (7.5 BLK%, -7% on-off opponent rim frequency, -2.5 on-off opponent rim FG%) alongside elite measurements (7 feet tall, 250 lb, with a +6 wingspan).

A low-ish drive frequency and high scoring assisted rate coupled with his age could potentially deny “wing Bittle.“ This is nonetheless a worthwhile risk to me considering how special his blend of cognition, touch and traditional center defense is.

Avi Chauhan – Duke Miles, Vanderbilt

Miles is one of the longest-tenured players in college basketball, with stops at Troy, High Point, Oklahoma, and Vanderbilt across 6 years. He was a freshman at the same time as Cade Cunningham and Scottie Barnes.

Miles is also one of the lightest players eligible to be selected in the 2026 draft, as he measured in at 170 pounds with just a 6’0.75 shoeless frame at the G League Combine. In fact, Miles was a late invite to the G-League Combine, not amongst the 44 players initially selected.

This may seem puzzling at first glance. Miles was one of the most productive guards in the country against legitimate competition: he racked up a 9.9 BPM and top 40 RAPM against top 100 teams. However, with extreme weaknesses in his frame and age, it’s understandable why Miles has failed to gain as much traction as his basketball production would imply.

Miles also pairs two extreme strengths: his scoring touch and defensive aptitude.

Miles is a legitimate four-level scorer. He’s a strong driver, with career finishing numbers well above that of a smaller guard. Miles is quick, but his interior effectiveness is built on his deceleration and body control within traffic. When caught amongst bodies in the paint, he has the patience to pause and get to scoops or step throughs. His lack of weight does not prevent him from baiting opposing bigs to foul; this year, he had a monstrous 50 free-throw rate.

But while Miles can get to his spots, what’s especially standout (and arguably more important) is his touch. Despite a high degree of difficulty by virtue of their unassistedness, Miles has consistently made runners, scoop shots, or pull-ups inside the arc. Across his college career, he’s shot nearly 45% on non-rim 2s, a rate akin to some of the NBA’s best midrange shotsmen a la Jalen Brunson or Ajay Mitchell. Making tons of rim attempts on top of efficiently converting midrangers gives Miles a gaudy career 2P above 55%. This sort of inside-arc efficiency on a micro-assisted rate is difficult to find comparisons for, especially with Miles’ diminutive frame.

An even better indication of Miles’ superb touch is his elite FT%. There have been just 11 other high major player-seasons of 90% FT on 150 FTAs or more. The vast majority were poor finishers; John Tonje was the only player of this group who matched Miles’ finishing and FT% goodness. But he was well below-average at accumulating steals and assists, while these happen to be Miles’ defining skill singularities (yes, even beyond his scoring touch).

This is the crux of what makes Miles such an interesting bet. Of course, Miles is the standard small guard with elite cognition. With a 5% steal rate and 27% assist rate during his final NCAA season, his pre-college profile stacks up favorably to two smalls that recently played in the Finals: TJ McConnell and Jose Alvarado. But Miles is also a legitimately special scorer, with strengths as a rim finisher, foul drawer, midrange shooter, and free throw maker. The chance he can rely on this scoring touch at his size and age is small, but the small chance that he can sustain high usage should be considered additive. It’s an interesting take on versatility, giving Miles a number of avenues to successful floor outcomes even with a firmly capped ceiling.

How many players since 2008 have shot a career 62% at the rim, 42% on far 2s, 80% at the line, while drawing a 35 free throw rate? It’s a list of 40 players.

How many of these players were guards, with a career assist rate over 23%? Just five: Derrick White, Ajay Mitchell, De’Vante Jones, Jalen Brunson, and Miles. And De’Vante had no dunks across his 108 game college career, while Miles has 8.

Miles is much smaller and older than these players were as prospects, but his combination of touch and cognition is impressive even relative to players of his height that usually excel in these regards. He has both the skill singularity and well-roundedness to stick in the league.

Miles’ biggest hole may not be his age, or his frame. I think it’s actually his ability to make threes. Miles has a stiff upper body and exaggeratedly swings his legs forward on both C&S and OTD 3s. On the shooting load, there are moments where his knees are flexed well ahead of his toes. This type of stiff, swaying shooting motion makes his C&S attempts look overly difficult, and it contributed to a career low 32% C&S 3P conversion rate despite a career high FT% at Vanderbilt. I trust his pristine shooting indicators to help him regress towards a more palatable career 3P% in the NBA, but the shooting downside should be considered.

Still, his mediocre career 3P% is somewhat mild if it’s truly his biggest weakness. This sort of two-pronged skill, as a scorer and basketball thinker, should give him a strong floor when paired with strong general production metrics. Amongst the cohort of players not invited to even the NBA Combine, that’s more than enough for me.

Joe Hulbert – Vsevolod Ishchenko, Lokomotiv Kuban

This is one I’ve gone back and forth on. But the player I have ultimately landed on is Seva Ishchenko. The Russian wing is a player who has been on my radar since February. What is first striking about him is how low he can get with his handle considering how big he is. He measures at 6’8 and there are reports he has a 7 foot wingspan (waiting for confirmation on that). He’s able to get low with the ball and possesses pretty much all of the physical skills to be able to access all options on the flowchart once he reaches the paint.

The term ‘pass drive and shoot’ is often thrown around too much and quite often I find myself disagreeing like I did in my Amari Allen article (linked here). With Ishchenko, the label absolutely fits. He’s shot 46 percent from beyond the arc this season, and generally has shown good shooting indicators throughout his career. He’s steadily improved from 73 percent at the line, to 79 percent over the past 3 years, and has 2 straight seasons shooting 40 percent or more from beyond, with that number being 46 percent this year.

The shot doesn’t look overly convincing mechanically, but it goes in, and he possesses an excellent first step and good east-west moves which is important for a corner shooter if they want to drive baseline. His volume isn’t notably high right now, but it’s worth noting his team ranks in just the 9th percentile of spot-up jumper frequency, with their offensive focus largely being in other areas. He can definitely up the volume; he largely is being used in lower usage areas such as a cutter when in the half-court, with the majority of his diet coming in transition.

The biggest knock (particularly from the sheet side of our staff) will be the turnovers. Quite often with European prospects it’s one play-type that will tank turnovers. In Ischenko’s case he does seem to turn the ball over quite often. From watching every turnover he’s made, the most common problem seems to be being overwhelmed at a crowded paint. I don’t see a major processing issue outside of PNRs, which leads me to think the turnover rate can drop with a more defined role and less of a transition emphasis. The PNR reps were not great, but I wouldn’t have that as a huge focus at the next level.

On that topic, it’s also worth noting how poor of a shooting team he has around him. Of their top 8 players, only former Mount Olive PF Mike Moore can shoot the ball. The rest of the team including guards is a very poor shooting supporting cast which will do a good job explaining why he can struggle driving off the catch late in the shot clock. Poor spacing will lead to poor decisions and his driving abilities are kind of suppressed by Kuban’s end of clock concepts. He also is largely pigeonholed for PNR duties because he’s one of very few players on the roster with any perimeter threat.

Defensively, he’s strong and able to generate stocks, but he’s also positionally sound and quite versatile. I think this gives him a lot of lineup versatility which is something I value a lot in second round picks. This is truthfully the main reason I’m in on him, and why he’s in my top 30. I think he can be a well above average defender. Often guys with that label don’t have much on offense, but I think his driving and shooting are both at a good level. The passing tools might be there for connective ability; that’s a short way off at the moment.

I often find wings to be misvalued. I think the traditional 3-and-D wing is an overrated role and having some kind of offensive viability in ways other than spot-up shooting is important. Think of the baseline drives Jaden McDaniels gives the Timberwolves in playoff settings as an example. I think Ishchenko has enough there alongside the defense that I’m willing to plant my flag on him. I think his worst tendencies are empowered by Kuban’s lack of spacing, and I really think he can be an excellent wing at the NBA level.

Will Morris- Cade Tyson, Minnesota

When looking at deep sleepers, it’s especially important to find special traits rather than fully complete players. Chances are you aren’t going to find an All-Star on the undrafted free agent market. Cade Tyson is far from perfect, and has had one of the stranger college careers that I can remember. I was a big fan of him after a couple of elite shooting seasons at Belmont. Then he transferred to UNC and fell out of the rotation. Then he transferred to Minnesota and was the undisputed best player on a Big Ten team, averaging 19.6 points per game on 50-41-82 splits.

Say what you want about his poor stint at UNC, but Tyson is an elite shooter at 6’7”. There have been 57 6’6”+ players since 2008 to hit over 450 career threes and shoot over 40%. 13 of them were drafted, and some of the notable undrafted guys to hit those marks were Sam Hauser and Duncan Robinson. When we talk about special traits, skills that will actually get you on an NBA floor, Tyson has it with his combination of size and versatile shooting. He has a smooth release coming off of off-ball actions and is confident to take some. I’ve also been consistently impressed with his feel for cutting and finishing. He had 10 dunks this year and shot 76.9% at the rim.

There’s a legitimate chance that Tyson sticks around the league for a bit as a shooting specialist that isn’t THAT un-athletic. He has a legitimate NBA skill, and you always bet on legitimate NBA skills as the draft goes deeper.

Michael Neff – Tamin Lipsey

Lipsey might feel like a boring answer. That’s part of why I feel great about it. Lipsey’s been on draft radars for a while now, making his omission from the NBA Combine that much stranger. He’s a 3x All-Big 12 player and 3x Big 12 All-Defensive player, he has a career 4.4 STL%, and a 2.4 AST:TO ratio. He simply has an iron-clad resume of feel for the game. Defense is the real calling card that gives Lipsey a chance to succeed. We just got done watching yet another NBA playoffs where positive defender guards lined every rotation among the last teams standing. Lipsey’s arguably been college basketball’s best perimeter defender over the last three years. Sure, his size could hinder him, but he’ll make life difficult for opposing ball handlers and generate turnovers.

With guards, everyone bends over backwards to find special offensive players, but the commonality amongst all the guards in the NBA Finals? Defense. Even Jalen Brunson competes and uses his strength well on that end. Lipsey could belong in those conversations someday. Whether or not his offense works out remains to be seen. Personally, I’m optimistic. The playmaking and turnover avoidance stand out, but Lipsey quietly has a good unassisted shotmaking profile too. He shot 62.1% at the rim on 56% unassisted shots, and an eye-opening 43.6% from midrange on 86.4% unassisted shots. Lipsey’s no stranger to physicality in the paint (5.2 OREB% for a 6’0 guard is pretty ridiculous), and he’s got the feel to function in an NBA offense.

I don’t think we’re talking about a star guard here by any means. Lipsey’s outside shot (31.6% this year) and touch (65.6 FT% this year, 71% career) just don’t scream dynamic scorer. However, Lipsey has the mentality, feel, and defense to make an impact for winning teams. I can’t help but watch guys like TJ McConnell and Jose Alvarado make an impact in recent NBA Finals and not have a glimmer of optimism for Lipsey to translate.

Emiliano – Robert McCray V, Florida State

There are some things I’ve learned in the time I spent watching and analyzing G League basketball in recent years. One of them is that guard-sized players who can get to the rim, can stack steals, rack up some blocks while also adding some creation tend to translate to the NBA, even if their scoring profile looks tricky at times.

I’m thinking about players like Quenton Jackson or Jamaree Bouyea, just considering some of the most recent examples. Guys who can score at the G League level but can do much more stuff to make the translation smoother and that allows them to “fit in.”

There’s a guy that impacts the game in a similar way and I could envision in a NBA guard rotation sooner rather than later: Robert McCray V.

McCray was a redshirt senior at Florida State University this past season and he has a somewhat unimpressive physique: standing at 6’2.75 barefoot with a 6’4 wingspan and 193 pound frame, he certainly isn’t the biggest or longest guard around.

However, he possesses some impressive athletic features. With a 43.0 max vert, the best 3/4 Court Sprint and other solid results, he was clearly one of the winners of the G League Elite Camp strength and agility tests.

And his athletic tools look very functional both on tape and in the sheets. He plays with pace, glides through defenses and has some very strong statistical indicators. The mix of 2.1 BLK%, 2.5 STL%, 16 dunks, 33.7 Free Throw Rate, 45% rim frequency, 43.8 AST% and 1.7 AST/TO is a cool, funky ancillary package for a 6’3 guard.

Simply put, that intersection of functional athleticism, creation and decent feel is not that common.

There are some real concerns about his scoring profile considering his unremarkable three point shooting paired with a 55% on close 2s and a certain tendency to settle for mid range jumpers more often than ideal. He maybe lacks a clear NBA skill to build around, but his ability to impact the game in a variety of ways makes him an underrated prospect in the depth of the draft compared to other guards on the margins whose profile is centered around their scoring (and their usage, which can make the translation much more difficult).

Ben Pfeifer – Duke Miles, Vanderbilt

Vanderbilt senior guard Duke Miles will turn 25 midway through his rookie year. He hovers around six feet tall and didn’t become a star until his sixth and final college season. And yet, Miles’ confluence of skills, traits and statistical indicators projects him as a role-playing point guard who should thrive at the next level paired with a bigger initiator.

He authored a phenomenal final season in Nashville, specifically on the defensive end. Beyond his gargantuan five percent steal rate, no other guard in this class defended near his level on tape. Sharp instincts, elite core and lower body strength and a plus-five-ish (6’5.25”) wingspan allow him to defend well above his listed height.

Miles excelled in multiple different defensive roles his team tasked him with, most obviously thriving as an off-ball disruptor, intercepting passes and mucking up actions. He boasts the lateral agility and anchor to withstand powerful slashers. And when needed, even against towering, NBA-sized big men, Miles bruised down low on switches, denied entry passes and disallowed deep position.

A potent and modern Vanderbilt offense helped him produce at a career level, and he’s no offensive slouch when projecting to the NBA. Miles canned 34.8 percent of his 9.5 3-point attempts per 100 possessions and sank 90.1% of his free throws. Sub-par burst, vertical pop and inconsistent on-ball decision making likely cap his on-ball ceiling, but that shotmaking should suit him for a complementary offensive role in the league.

As most great NBA role players were before the league, Miles is overqualified skill-wise for his likely role, boasting deft footwork, passing/dribbling/finishing ambidexterity and a unique driving rhythm that defenses struggled to pin down. He might occasionally moonlight as a creator with bench units, but any live-dribble juice he brings only boosts his odds of sticking around.

His film and statistical profile transposed onto a 19-year-old player likely earns top-20 consideration. But Miles is not a teenage prospect and wasn’t close to NBA-caliber at that stage of his career. All of these limitations render him a second-round player for me, but in a world where Jose Alvarado (rightfully) closed an NBA finals game for the eventual titles, I’ll take my chances on another overlooked guard with defensive superpowers and projectable strengths on both ends.

Ahmed Jama – Oscar Cluff, Purdue

Purdue big man Oscar Cluff is my pick amongst the ‘fringe’ draft prospects to greatly exceed expectations. Despite Cluff’s skillset being frequently associated with that of an anachronistic big, he has the touch (career 73.2% FT shooter) , passing (career 15% assist rate with a 1.6 A:TO to boot) , and the rebounding (career 19.7 total rebound%) of a budding star at the margins. At 24.5 years old, Cluff is the oldest NCAA prospect in the draft, but has built a resume comparable to the best professional big in the world outside of the NCAA and NBA.

Of all NCAA career profiles in Bart Torvik, Cluff is one of eight players to ever post an offensive rebounding rate over 13% , steal rate over 1%, and career FT% over 70%. Of the 8 players to fall into this career query, six were drafted!

However, Cluff’s impact has not been confined to box score production. In fact, Cluff was able to maintain stellar lineup data along each stop of his NCAA career. From the 2023-24 season Cluff spent at Washington State to his final collegiate season at Purdue, Cluff registered Adjusted Net Ratings of: +2.6, +12.4, and +12.6. The areas that Cluff most consistently influenced his teams’ stylistic profile were, predictably, offensive rebounding and turnover suppression. This consistency is a large part of Cluff’s appeal as a prospect. The lack of imagination needed to project what shape a player’s impact may take in the pros only stands to benefit decision makers and coaches alike.

Wafe – Nate Bittle

The prospect with the best projection in my NBA draft model not to receive a combine invite also happens to be my favorite, Oregon center Nate Bittle. A major part of my player evaluation is the concept of “zooming out”, focusing more on a player’s broad traits and abilities. In Bittle’s case, he is huge and skilled with impressive NCAA metrics: typically a recipe for an NBA career. The pasty stretch five invokes Jay Huff and Luke Kornet, two of the better undrafted steals in recent memory. Another point of comparison is Golden State’s Quentin Post, the 52nd overall pick in the 2024 draft who has massively overperformed his draft slot, currently placing 12th in the class in VORP. Despite being snubbed for the combine, the league would be foolish to allow an NBA caliber big man go undrafted.

Brandon Manuel – Quadir Copeland, Syracuse

Guards who have the ability at this age to get paint touches at will whilst not having tunnel vision are very rare. Copeland aptly possesses this ability.

You’d be hard pressed to find guards in the class who posses his combination of rim assists and rim pressure. He’s super crafty, but his craft doesn’t stop him from playing through contact. The shot needs work and he needs to learn how to read game state better and keep the TOs low, but Copeland’s raw skill and physicality is worth betting on.

Ryan Kaminski – Tamin Lipsey, Iowa State

Lipsey is a tough-nosed guard whose connector skills as a natural point guard with defensive tenacity should provide two-way impact at the next level. His activity is especially apparent on tape, where just a few possessions will reveal a barrage of winning plays. Lipsey will navigate screens at point of attack defensively, hit shooters in shooting pockets, and then set up play finishers as a table setter. He can also score a little bit off the dribble.

Role players who defend, dribble, pass, shoot, and score while looking for the open man when considering the best shot for the team are an easy fit as playoff level rotation players around stars. Lipsey’s skillset clears these thresholds on all fronts.

If you enjoyed this, be on the look-out for more roundtables coming before draft day.

The post Swish Roundtable: Favorite Draft Sleepers appeared first on Swish Theory.

1. Cameron Boozer, Duke

2. Darryn Peterson, Kansas

3. AJ Dybantsa, BYU

4. Caleb Wilson, North Carolina

5. Kingston Flemings, Houston

6. Patrick Ngongba II, Duke

7. Tyler Tanner, Vanderbilt

When Swish Theory’s Big Board 1.0 dropped on December 2nd, we ranked Tyler Tanner 33rd when no other major outlet had him ranked in the top 60. Naturally, with his meteoric rise over the past month and a half that now has him in some outlets’ top 40, he’s similarly skyrocketed up our board as well.

The first criticism of a Tanner at 7 ranking would be his measly 6-foot height… but how much does that mean when he’s dunking, finishing, rebounding, and blocking shots against SEC competition at the rate of a 6-foot-4 guard? Once you go beyond his height, you find a lead guard prospect with a blend of feel and physicality on par with the greatest guard prospects in NCAA history, who’s applied this blend towards outlier scoring development without sacrificing ancillary production. With this newfound scoring prowess further opening passing windows that he’s capitalized on, the young-for-class sophomore is now the engine of a 7th-best Vanderbilt offense while also maintaining strong defense. Boasting an incredibly well-rounded profile, the question should not be “why Tyler Tanner top 10,” but “why not Tyler Tanner top 10.”

Maurya Kumpatla

8. Yaxel Lendeborg, Michigan

Yaxel Lendeborg continues to fly up draft boards as he dominates college basketball. His BPM is off the charts, and what makes his game special is the dynamic, all-around feel he brings on both ends of the floor. How many potential defensive anchors can dribble, pass, shoot, and attack as well as Lendeborg? With good-to-great attributes as a scorer, shooter, passer, rebounder, shot-swatter, and ball-stealer via Cerebro, that all-around skillset laid on top of a potentially elite and versatile defensive foundation provides a realistic path to a super high two-way potential ceiling and offers a very high floor as a high-end NBA rotation player.

Ryan Kaminski

9. Jayden Quaintance, Kentucky

10. Joshua Jefferson, Iowa State

After some unusual (for him) struggles mid-January, Joshua Jefferson returned to form with one of the most productive prospect games of the cycle: 17 points, 12 assists (0 turnovers), 10 rebounds (4 offensive), 4 steals, 1 block. How many prospects this class could do that, or in any class? Jefferson is listed at 6’9” and is highly skilled for a 240-pound player. While outside shooting is a weakness, he has still managed an acceptable 36% on 53 threes attempted this season. But you’re drafting Jefferson for his unique intersection of passing (5.3 assists per game, 2.1 ATO), rebounding (7.0 per game), and defensive playmaking (1.6 steals, 1.0 blocks per game). All signs point towards Jefferson being one of the highest feel players in class, which, when mixed with productivity and good NBA size, has a high hit rate of working out. With a major, versatile two-way burden on a top 20 NCAA offense and defense, Jefferson can take on all kinds of roles at the next level.

Matt Powers

11. Dailyn Swain, Texas

12. Bennett Stirtz, Iowa

13. Labaron Philon, Alabama

14. Koa Peat, Arizona

15. Hannes Steinbach, Washington

16. Aday Mara, Michigan

17. Malachi Moreno, Kentucky

18. Mikel Brown Jr., Louisville

19. Christian Anderson, Texas Tech

20. Darius Acuff, Arkansas

6’2 Arkansas guard Darius Acuff has quickly become one of the more polarizing draft prospects in this year’s draft. In a class featuring impressive depth at the guard spot, Acuff has managed to stand out by shouldering one of the highest offensive burdens of any high major freshman in recent memory. Currently, Darius Acuff is sporting a 45.3 Offensive Load, which is in the 80th percentile of all draft prospects since 2008. Acuff’s prioritization of the Arkansas offense has not been unwarranted, with Arkansas’ offense sitting 7th in the country in adjusted offensive rating, per Bart Torvik. Despite Acuff having a suboptimal scoring process (38% three point attempt rate would be in the 25th percentile for all guards since 2008), he’s managed to lead a prolific offense by avoiding mistakes (2.9 assist-to-turnover ratio) and pushing the pace to allow Arkansas’ supporting cast to capitalize on their open-court athleticism. Acuff is not without his flaws, though: his lack of defensive contributions has been a major limiting factor for Arkansas’ title aspirations. Versus teams ranked in the top 150, Arkansas’ defense is 13.1 points per 100 possessions BETTER without Acuff on the floor (101 possessions). Acuff’s effort and cognizance on the defensive side of the floor leave much to be desired at the moment. However, with Acuff possessing a strong 195-pound frame and a reported 6’7 wingspan, he has the physical tools to be a potential positive and transcend the roster limitations his archetype typically imposes. Ultimately, while I am skeptical Acuff will return value commensurate with his presumed draft position, there are indicators that he may be the exception to the rule when it comes to small, ball-dominant guards.

Ahmed Jama

21. Keaton Wagler, Illinois

Keaton Wagler has been the revelation of the freshman class. The 150th-ranked high school recruit quickly established himself as the best player on an Illinois team ranked seventh in the country by KenPom and is building a case as one of the top guards in the draft. At 6’6”, Wagler has the ideal size and offensive skillset for a two guard as an efficient, high-volume sniper with passing chops. The 18-year-old also pulls down an impressive 7 rebounds per 40 minutes, an underrated statistical indicator for guard prospects. I understand being skeptical due to weak or non-existent priors, but nearly 500 minutes into his freshman season, I think it can be safely said that Keaton Wagler is a baller.

Big Wafe

22. Karim Lopez, New Zealand

23. Daniel Jacobsen, Purdue

Daniel Jacobsen is a productive sophomore center for Purdue, listed at 7’4 and 250 pounds. This all but assures that he will play in the NBA at some point, as just two NBA players this season were listed above 7’3: Zach Edey and Victor Wembanyama. 

While he appears skinny and doesn’t play a high proportion of minutes, the argument to draft Jacobsen this year simply stems from his uniquely high likelihood of playing NBA minutes. It can be construed as an argument of scarcity: without major flaws with his touch, rebounding, or shotblocking, Jacobsen immediately has plug-and-play value in the NBA. Sure, he’s clearly raw, but most drafted underclassmen are. The difficulty in correctly identifying long-term professional players with any non-premium draft pick must be considered.

Avinash Chauhan

24. Álvaro Folgueiras, Iowa

25. Tounde Yessoufou, Baylor

26. Thomas Haugh, Florida

27. Motiejus Krivas, Arizona

28. Nate Ament, Tennessee

29. Meleek Thomas, Arkansas

30. Brayden Burries, Arizona

31. Cameron Carr, Baylor

32. Braylon Mullins, UConn

33. Paul McNeil, NC State

34. Bruce Thornton, Ohio State

35. JoJo Tugler, Houston

36. Kayden Mingo, Penn State

37. Elyjah Freeman, Auburn

38. Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

39. Amari Allen, Alabama

40. Henri Veesaar, North Carolina

41. Tamin Lipsey, Iowa State

Tamin Lipsey is a strange prospect by most measures – he’s old-ish, not a great scorer, nor does he have a phenomenal free-throw rate. Still, an early second-round grade seems like great value for a player who has a monstrous 5.6 A/TO ratio and a high steal percentage. Both are great signals of cognition, and both indicate that he creates/maintains new possessions, which is an increasingly valuable trait in a game where players and teams win on the margins. Of course, the low 3P/100 rate is scary, but he’s a good finisher at the rim (even if he’s down from last season). In combination with his physicality and cognition, he seems like a great value bet to be at least a rotation guard one day.

Joseph George

42. Morez Johnson Jr., Michigan

Johnson came in at 23 on my personal board, and he’s been steadily rising throughout the season. The thesis for Morez being high on my board is the simple paradigm of age-adjusted production and impact. 

The eye test reveals archetype problems that Morez needs to solve. At 6’9, he’s undersized for a big, and his perimeter skill set doesn’t appear up to snuff for a wing or forward in the NBA right now. The good news is this: Morez’s interior dominance is NBA caliber, as he’s shooting 76.4% at the rim. His rebounding numbers are down from last year. But, he put up a whopping 17.3 ORB% and 22.5 DRB% as a true center at Illinois. He’s shown enough to suggest he can hang physically in the pros. Additionally, he’s taken a jump in assist rate, steal rate, and free-throw shooting. Morez wouldn’t have an NBA-caliber perimeter skill set upon entering the league. But this rate of improvement in his touch and cognition suggests some upside for him to get there.

It would be easy to dismiss him as a Michigan merchant, given the number of great players around him. But Morez’s impact seems to outshine that of his frontcourt teammate Aday Mara. BartTorvik has Morez at a 12.6 BPM compared to Mara’s 10.1, while Hoop-Explorer has Morez with a +11.2 RAPM compared to Mara’s +7.7. I thought I preferred Mara to Morez when I formed my board, but all evidence points to more good things happening on the court as a result of Morez Johnson. He’s not a mere passenger on the Michigan train this year; he’s a co-conductor along with Yaxel Lendeborg. This is a fascinating player and prospect that deserves top 20 consideration in the 2026 draft.

Michael Neff

43. Ebuka Okorie, Stanford

44. Neoklis Avdalas, Virginia Tech

45. Killyan Toure, Iowa State

46. Zvonimir Ivisic, Arkansas

47. Isaiah Evans, Duke

48. Flory Bidunga, Kansas

49. Braden Smith, Purdue

50. Ja’Kobi Gillespie, Tennessee

51. JT Toppin, Texas Tech

52. Nolan Winter, Wisconsin

53. Nate Bittle, Oregon

54. Jalen Washington, Vanderbilt

55. Matt Able, NC State

56. Chris Cenac Jr., Houston

57. Darrion Williams, NC State

58. Acaden Lewis, Villanova

59. Richie Saunders, BYU

60. Mario Saint-Supery, Gonzaga

The post 2026 NBA Draft Big Board 2.0 appeared first on Swish Theory.

Duke, freshman, 6’9”, 250 pounds.

29.0 minutes, 22.9 points, 9.9 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 1.9 steals, 1.1 blocks per game. 2.7 ATO and 69% true shooting.

2. Darryn Peterson

Kansas, freshman, 6’6”, 205 pounds.

25.5 minutes, 21.5 points, 3.5 rebounds, 3.0 assists, 2.0 steals, 1.0 blocks per game. 1.5 ATO and 73% true shooting.

3. Caleb Wilson

North Carolina, freshman, 6’10”, 215 pounds.

28.3 minutes, 19.9 points, 9.9 rebounds, 2.1 assists, 1.7 steals, 1.3 blocks per game. 1.3 ATO and 65% true shooting.

4. AJ Dybantsa

BYU, freshman, 6’9”, 210 pounds.

30.7 minutes, 19.0 points, 6.4 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 0.6 steals, 0.3 blocks per game. 1.1 ATO and 61% true shooting.

5. Kingston Flemings

Houston, freshman, 6’4”, 190 pounds.

30.3 minutes, 15.3 points, 3.6 rebounds, 5.0 assists, 1.3 steals, 0.4 blocks per game. 2.9 ATO and 69% true shooting.

6. Jayden Quaintance

Kentucky, sophomore, 6’10.5”, 255 pounds.

(Freshman stats) 29.6 minutes, 9.4 points, 7.9 rebounds, 1.5 assists, 1.1 steals, 2.6 blocks per game. 0.8 ATO and 54% true shooting.

7. Patrick Ngongba II

Duke, sophomore, 6’11”, 250 pounds.

22.6 minutes, 12.8 points, 6.5 rebounds, 2.1 assists, 0.5 steals, 1.1 blocks per game. 1.2 ATO and 72% true shooting.

8. Bennett Stirtz

Iowa, senior, 6’4”, 190 pounds.

37.7 minutes, 18.6 points, 2.9 rebounds, 5.4 assists, 1.7 steals, 0.1 blocks per game. 3.5 ATO and 65% true shooting.

9. Koa Peat

Arizona, freshman, 6’8”, 235 pounds.

26.9 minutes, 15.6 points, 5.7 rebounds, 2.9 assists, 0.9 steals, 0.9 blocks per game. 1.5 ATO and 57% true shooting.

10. Nate Ament

Tennessee, freshman. 6’10”, 207 pounds.

27.5 minutes, 17.9 points, 7.6 rebounds, 3.0 assists, 1.9 steals, 0.1 blocks per game. 1.3 ATO and 56% true shooting.

11. Aday Mara, Michigan

12. Mikel Brown Jr., Louisville

13. Dailyn Swain, Texas

14. Karim Lopez, New Zealand

15. Yaxel Lendeborg, Michigan

16. Labaron Philon, Alabama

17. Álvaro Folgueiras, Iowa

18. Hannes Steinbach, Washington

19. Paul McNeil Jr., NC State

20. Malachi Moreno, Kentucky

21. Cayden Boozer, Duke

22. Joshua Jefferson, Iowa

23. Elyjah Freeman, Auburn

24. Cameron Carr, Baylor

25. Meleek Thomas, Arkansas

26. Thomas Haugh, Florida

27. Braylon Mullins, Connecticut

28. Darrion Williams, NC State

29. JT Toppin, Texas Tech

30. Christian Anderson, Texas Tech

31. Nate Bittle, Oregon

32. Tounde Yessoufou, Baylor

33. Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

34. Flory Bidunga, Kansas

35. Isaiah Evans, Duke

36. Tyler Tanner, Vanderbilt

37. Jacob Cofie, USC

38. Neoklis Avdalas, Virginia Tech

39. Mario Saint-Supery, Gonzaga

40. Miles Byrd, San Diego State

41. Ja’Kobi Gillespie, Tennessee

42. Henri Veesaar, North Carolina

43. Sebastian Williams-Adams, Auburn

44. Dame Sarr, Duke

45. Jaden Toombs, SMU

46. Zvonimir Ivisic, Illinois

47. JoJo Tugler, Houston

48. Motiejus Krivas, Arizona

49. David Mirkovic, Illinois

50. Bruce Thornton, Ohio State

51. Chris Cenac Jr., Houston

52. Johann Grünloh, Virginia

53. Richie Saunders, BYU

54. Daniel Jacobsen, Purdue

55. Amari Allen, Alabama

56. Sergio de Larrea, Valencia

57. Braden Smith, Purdue

58. Matt Able, NC State

59. Alex Condon, Florida

60. Ebuka Okorie, Stanford

The post 2026 NBA Draft Big Board 1.0 appeared first on Swish Theory.

1. Utah Jazz – Cooper Flagg, Duke

If you can believe it, I came away from my most recent Duke watch even higher on Cooper Flagg. “There is an easy case to be made for Flagg ending up a consistent top 5 player” is what I wrote in my Flagg scouting report from January, and that may have been an undersell. While he is not perfect – namely his rim efficiency drops against good teams – Flagg’s advancement as an on-ball creator and overall scorer throughout the season only increases his primary odds. He quickened his release in a more stable way, figured out how to hunt short midrange looks and pass succinctly out of those drives. Considering his wiring as a problem-solver with a second-to-none motor, layered on top of an excellent existing skillset at age 18, Flagg may have MVP upside if things click.

Matt Powers

2. Washington Wizards – Dylan Harper, Rutgers

Dylan Harper arrived on Rutgers campus this fall with much fanfare, with the expectations that himself and fellow 5-star recruit Ace Bailey would lead Rutgers to their first tournament appearance since 2022. While the team fell short of these lofty expectations, Harper turned in one of the more impressive floor-raising seasons of any freshman in recent memory. In spite of a flawed supporting cast, Harper was able to lead Rutgers to a top-40 offense while shouldering the lion’s share of playmaking and scoring responsibilities. Harper suffered an illness induced mid-season swoon, but still managed to finish 70% at the rim on substantial volume while avoiding turnovers on these drives. Harper’s turnover economy should also ease any concerns Wizard’s fans may have of Harper’s ability to scale next to other ballhandlers they may acquire in the future. While some consternation related to Harper’s shooting potential is valid, his ability to consistently shoot off the catch, dating back to his high-school days, serves as further evidence Harper can quickly acclimate to a more complimentary role offensively.

Ahmed Jama

3. Charlotte Hornets – Collin Murray-Boyles, South Carolina

At 6’8”, Collin-Murray Boyles is a premier defensive prospect who leverages his feel, hand-eye coordination, and strength on both sides of the court. With a 4.7 BLK% and 2.8 STL% for his college career, Murray Boyles’ ground coverage, length, and feel enable him to consistently force possessions to end, something that the Hornets greatly need. It isn’t just the event creation; he’s a fantastic defensive rebounder, where he posted a 21.3 DREB% over his two years at South Carolina.

On offense, Collin-Murray Boyles can act as a face-up scorer, roller, and elite playmaker as a passer, where he often makes layered reads on the short-roll and out of the post. His defensive value gives him a positive intersection of skills that would allow him to boost Charlotte’s transition offense (worst in the league in efficiency and 6th lowest in volume), acting as a passing outlet and downhill scorer off of steals, blocks, and defensive rebounds. With large creators that have shooting gravity like Lamelo Ball and Brandon Miller, Collin Murray Boyles’ shooting issues would be insulated to a degree, and he would get them better shots through effective screen assists and high-leverage passing. Having a player like Murray-Boyles operate in the short-roll and play out of DHOs would take the Hornets’ offense to another tier, especially since he would have gravity as a scorer both with his face-up game and downhill pressure.

Murray-Boyles is the best player available to me due to his tremendous defensive value, collegiate production for an underclassman, and high degree of feel relative to his age, but it’s his synergistic fit with the Hornets that will draw out the best of his strengths that makes me excited to draft him at this slot.

Roshan Potluri

4. New Orleans Pelicans – VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

VJ Edgecombe is an undeniable athlete with a steep development curve. Edgecombe is a blur in the open floor with a smooth jumper off the catch and a tenacious defensive mindset. His ability to create buckets off the bounce was on full display playing for the Bahamas Men’s International Team this past summer. While that creation equity did not translate directly to the college level, his growth as a ball handler and athletic upside gives plenty of reason for hope. He shouldn’t be asked to do too much too soon in New Orleans with the existing talent on the roster, and his defensive impact and open court ferocity should fit right in.

Tyler Wilson

5. Philadelphia Sixers – Noa Essengue, ULM

At pick 5, Noa Essengue would be a tremendous fit with the Philadelphia 76ers while taking the best prospect available. Essengue dominated the German BBL as a teenager for Ratiopharm Ulm, overwhelming teams on both sides of the floor with his size, length, and ground-coverage, enabling him to post a 61.8 TS%, 13.4 TOTAL REB%, 0.98 A/TO, above 2 BLK%, and 2 STL%. Even as the second youngest prospect in the 2025 NBA Draft, he was able to post a 17.9 PER in a competitive professional league. For the same reasons that he was productive in the BBL, he can provide value on his rookie deal on the 76ers while being an appealing upside bet for the team due to his intersection of measurables, coordination, feel, and touch. On offense, Noa Essengue is a legitimate threat in transition and can provide value as a vertical threat and off-the-catch driver. Even with his sinewy frame, he applies immense physicality downhill, which shows up on the stat sheet in his bonkers 72 FTR. Essengue’s 3-point shot is still a work in progress, but he’s always had touch, and there has been real growth over the years in his mechanics and energy transfer.

Essengue is also a very versatile defender, stifling opponents with his lateral agility and length at the POA, nail, and backline. The combination of production for age, defensive versatility, outlier tools (9’3.25 standing reach at 6’ 10), feel, and touch makes him an intriguing upside bet in the top five.

Roshan Potluri

6. Brooklyn Nets – Ace Bailey, Rutgers

In the midst of a team-building crossroads, Brooklyn goes for an upside star swing on forward Ace Bailey of Rutgers. The 6’10 Bailey has solid physical tools that he displays on both ends, but really pops offensively with his dazzling scoring ability, including a tantalizing pull-up shot-making package, particularly in the midrange, where he has the ability to rise and fire over the top of defenders with seeming ease. In isolation, Ace is, pardon the pun, an “ace” in the department, as he is relatively unbothered by defenders once he gets to his preferred spots, and is already very adept at attempting-and converting-shots that would be deemed extremely difficult by most. He is also a player who can get hot in a hurry, and when he is in a rhythm, is a tough cover for many defenders, nearly regardless of size. Defensively, Bailey competes and makes the most of his length to bother opposing players, and his effort shines through on that end pretty consistently. His defensive awareness off the ball could improve, but for the “offensive finisher” archetype, he is much more of a two-way player. Overall, as a prospect Bailey’s ceiling is very high. There is a lot of room for growth with his handle and passing to fully realize his complete creation potential, and his offensive awareness regarding what constitutes a good shot could use some extensive refining, but as it stands right now, Bailey will be able to make an immediate impact on a young Nets team that is trying to find its way.

Corban Ford

7. Toronto Raptors – Khaman Maluach, Duke

Masai tends to prefer length with developable ball skills in his draft prospects, and Maluach leaves nothing to be desired when it comes to measurables. Standing 7’2” with a 7’5” wingspan and 9’8” standing reach, Khaman can touch the rim without jumping. Maluach has Olympic experience with the South Sudan team, and is coming off a sensational freshman season on a dominant Duke team. Khaman brings a stabilizing presence down low with one of the highest floors in the draft as a rim-roller; no prospect was as efficient of a lob threat rim-finisher as Khaman. Maluach flashes shooting touch on tough shots when given opportunity and brings great defensive intensity, footwork, and hands on both side of the floor. This move could help build the front court of the future alongside Scottie Barnes with another defensive anchor and a rim roller option to toss lobs to in P&R.

Ryan Kaminski

8. San Antonio Spurs – Kon Knueppel, Duke

Kon Knueppel’s jumper is about as fundamentally gorgeous as they come. On a loaded Duke roster Kon thrived hunting his shot off ball, hitting over 40% of his threes on over 10 attempts per 100 possessions. Knueppel is not a bouncy athlete, but is tough as nails with a strong lower half that allows for more positional versatility than at first glance. San Antonio desperately needs shooting to surround the Fox/Wemby pick and roll, and Kon is far and away the best possible fit in this class. Playing off of that gravity should allow for Kon to make an immediate impact and allow for a longer time horizon in the development of his off the bounce creation.

Tyler Wilson

9. Houston Rockets – Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

There’s a strong chance Houston trades this pick in real life, but for the purposes of this mock draft, they’ll be happy to add a creator like Fears with potential to remedy many of their offensive issues. Fears’s unique blend of burst, handling skill and shooting touch makes him a genuine primary handler bet, something the Rockets desperately need. Houston has the defensive infrastructure to help minimize his weaknesses on that end.

Ben Pfeifer

10. Portland Trailblazers – Derik Queen, Maryland

Queen isn’t a perfectly snug fit in Portland, but the Blazers couldn’t pass on the clear best player available left on the board. Elite movement skills, handling and touch help Queen dominate as an advantage creator with the feel and mobility to project more passing and defensive growth. Adding another shaky outside shooter will present some challenges, but Queen’s star ceiling is worth tinkering around.

Ben Pfeifer

11. Dallas Mavericks – Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

After parting with their franchise centerpiece and losing star Kyrie Irving for nearly the entirety of next season, the Dallas Mavericks fill a desperate playmaking need with the selection of Kasparas Jakucionis out of Illinois. The broad-framed, 6’6 guard has great positional size to go along with superb floor-mapping skill, and he makes the most of these tools along with his impeccable footwork to dictate the game at his own pace, stymying defenders while creating opportunities for his teammates. As a scorer, Jakucionis is adept playing out of the pick and roll, getting to the lane and finishing with touch and craft. His frame comes into play here as well, as he is able to seek out contact and still convert, and he generates free throw attempts in bunches. As a shooter, his form is solid and looks sound overall, even if the three point shooting numbers stand to improve overall. Defensively, Jakucionis is proficient, especially with his physical tools, where his quick feet and prodding hands help him hold up on most assignments. He can be prone to blow-bys by quicker players, and the physicality he brings on the offensive end isn’t quite the same on the defensive side, but he is by no means a liability on that end. All in all, Kasparas Jakucionis’ playmaking, shooting upside, and overall potential is a great fit on a Dallas team that needs to balance immediate contributions alongside future promise.

Corban Ford

12. Chicago Bulls – Tre Johnson, Texas

The Chicago Bulls should consider drafting Tre Johnson with the 12th pick in the 2025 NBA Draft due to his elite scoring ability and potential to address their need for a dynamic offensive guard. At 6’6” with a 7’0” wingspan, Johnson, a Texas freshman, led the SEC in scoring with 19.9 points per game, showcasing his three-level scoring prowess, including 39.2% three-point shooting and crafty footwork reminiscent of Devin Booker. His ability to create shots off the dribble, in isolation 81% of his 97-rim attempts were unassisted and he shot 59% on those, and off screens makes him a potential go-to scorer for a Bulls team transitioning to a youth-focused rebuild after trading Zach LaVine and DeMar DeRozan. While his shot selection and defensive consistency need refinement, his size, high basketball IQ, and playmaking flashes (second on Texas in assists) suggest he can develop into a versatile two-way wing. With Nikola Vucevic’s future uncertain and a need for a franchise cornerstone, Johnson’s upside as a high-volume scorer makes him a strong fit at pick 12, especially in a draft with a perceived drop-off after the top four.

Larry Golden

13. Atlanta Hawks – Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

The Atlanta Hawks are in desperate need of an interior presence, not only to shore up their rim-protection, but to provide Trae Young a release valve. The lack of interior size and a viable finisher has restricted Trae’s potency as a scorer and limited Atlanta’s offense. Ryan Kalkbrenner has been one of the most effective and prolific interior scorers in the collegiate ranks over the past few years, finishing just under 70% at the rim on over 1300 career attempts. Kalkbrenner’s offensive value isn’t limited to his presence around the rim, Kalkbrenner’s punishing screens have been the bedrock in many ways for Creighton’s motion-heavy offense. As much of a boon as Kalkbrenner’s offensive capabilities have been, there is perhaps no area where his impact is more acutely felt than the defensive end. Creighton’s personnel outside of Kalkbrenner consists of offensively slanted players, placing immense pressure on Kalkbrenner to not only alter shots around the rim but suppress opponent’s rim attempts entirely. This is an objective Kalkbrenner has carried out year in and year out during his tenure at Creighton. And while Kalkbrenner’s raw block numbers and block rate are particularly eye-popping for a rim-protector, in each of the past 3 seasons Creighton has allowed less shots at the rim on lower efficiency with Kalkbrenner on the court versus off-court. The clear pathways for Kalkbrenner to be a positive player on both ends of the court make him a clear cut top-20 player, with a skillset tailormade to help the Atlanta Hawks immediately.

Ahmed Jama

14. San Antonio Spurs – Jase Richardson, Michigan State

Jase Richardson is a double dip on shotmaking for San Antonio here in the late lottery. A French connection (Penda, Essengue) is intriguing here if available, but with the arrival of Fox, ascendance of Stephon Castle, and the organizational commitment to Jeremy Sochan there is no greater long term need for this team than shooting the basketball. Richardson posted a 55/41/84 shooting split while canning over 40% of his mid range jumpers. He’s a great shooter both on and off the ball, plays tough defense and has intriguing upside as a pick and roll ball handler. Richardson is a skeleton key for the Spurs’ backcourt, fitting seamlessly with just about any lineup construction newly minted head coach Mitch Johnson decides to throw out there.

Tyler Wilson

15. Oklahoma City Thunder – Carter Bryant, Arizona

Carter Bryant displayed an advanced application of tools, volume shooting, and baseline feel as a 19-year-old last season. At 6-foot-8 and 225 lbs with a 7-foot wingspan, he already has an NBA-ready frame and utilized it to produce a 5.8% block rate and 2.8% steal rate, showcasing legitimate point-of-attack utility and secondary rim protection. On the other end, he shot 37% from three on a massive 59 three-point rate, finished 71% of his rim attempts, and dunked 17 times, building out the perfect playfinishing profile. 69.5% on 59 free throws is a slightly worrying shooting indicator, but 88% on 58 free throws over a two-year EYBL sample suggests this is more of a sample size issue. While Bryant’s usage and self-creation rates suffered from scaling down at Arizona, both of those marks were much higher in EYBL, potentially hinting at some latent creation value. On an Oklahoma City Thunder team that emphasizes ball skills, that would be put to the test, but he fits perfectly within their defensive playmaking, rim protection from all positions, and volume shooting.

Maurya Kumpatla

16. Orlando Magic – Danny Wolf, Michigan

Have you seen this guy play basketball? Danny Wolf is a grab-and-go seven-foot offensive hub diming up defenses on fast breaks and pick and rolls. Wolf flashes exciting handles, natural point center vision, and incredible feel for the game, hitting highlight pull-up threes and tough finishing touch shots at the rim. Danny makes good reads as a primary decision maker reacting to defenses, averaging 1.01 PPP on “P&R including passes” that ranks in the 84th percentile of all college players.

Ryan Kaminski

17. Minnesota Timberwolves – Labaron Philon, Alabama

Philon was an easy pick for me here. I have him ranked a fair bit higher. I believe he has some untapped potential on offense, but generally he brings the type of quick decisionmaking that the Wolves need structurally to make their front-court work. He’s a nice connective piece with upside which makes him an easy pick here.

Joe Hulbert

18. Washington Wizards – Adou Thiero, Arkansas

Adou Thiero is a high volume, punishing driver with ridiculous transition scoring dominance, paired with long arms and elite run/jump athleticism. By all accounts, he is the most functional athlete in this draft class. Despite questionable shooting upside, Adou’s reaction time on defense is notable, and he should emerge as one of the league’s best defenders somewhat quickly. His strong applied physicality, defensive event maxxing, and reasonable 12% assist rate/1 A:TO indicate some semblance of latent feel, which is uncommon for wings of Adou’s athletic caliber. Washington zags from its contemporaneous strategy of targeting high-risk teenagers and takes a young junior that will set the tone for the Wizards’ revamped defense.

Avinash Chauhan

19. Brooklyn Nets – Asa Newell, Georgia

For a team currently bereft of high-end talent or foundational prospects, the Brooklyn Nets should prioritize acquiring young, malleable pieces who can accentuate the skillset of whatever star they eventually bring into the fold. Asa Newell brings a swiss army knife skillset to whatever frontcourt he joins. Newell made major strides this past season as a shooter, elevating his free-throw percentage by over 20 percentage points, and showing softer touch around the basket than he had at any point of his high-school tenure with a vaunted Montverde Academy. Newell finished 13th in the country in Offensive Box Plus-Minus, and was second amongst freshmen. Despite his subpar 3-point efficiency and playmaking numbers, Newell’s effectiveness as an interior scorer and offensive rebounder should ease his transition to the NBA and make him one of the more reliable bets in this range of the draft

Ahmed Jama

20. Miami Heat – Kam Jones, Marquette

This pick mostly leans into the type of thing Miami would do, which I don’t want to be seen entirely as a negative. Kam Jones drastically improved his playmaking this year, it was probably the biggest skill increase in the entire class. This increases his upside. I have concerns about the free throw rate, but Jones is the type of guard the Heat have targeted for the last decade, a slasher who knows how to play the game in the half-court.

Joe Hulbert

21. Utah Jazz – Noah Penda, Le Mans

Over the last two seasons, Noah Penda has hovered around 8% OREB, 16% assist, 4% block, and 3% steal, with 1.6 A:TO and 0.4 FTR. The only high major players to even hit career 7o/15a/3b/2.5s/1.5 a:to are Otto Porter Jr. and Draymond Green. Enough said. Penda is a large bodied driver with legit handling ability, and he’s made real strides as a shooter. He projects as a high feel, two-way connector with as good of a shot as any to land on a few All-Defense teams. Despite the usage of connector as a sort of euphemism, this sort of oreb/assist/stock wing with legit high end feel doesn’t come along every draft. This is exactly the sort of low friction, high EV mold that the Jazz should be looking to target in the middle of the first round.

Avinash Chauhan

22. Atlanta Hawks – Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

The Atlanta Hawks get a lottery-caliber big/forward at pick 22 with Thomas Sorber. While Thomas Sorber played more as a center for Georgetown his freshman season, he’s got the processing, touch, coordination, and mobility to scale down as a forward. He has his limitations as a ground-bound player, impacting his rim finishing and causing him to become more creative in finding finishing angles. However, his fundamentals and his ability to carve space with his body are quite advanced for a freshman, which enabled him to finish 65% of his non-dunk rim attempts despite the vertical challenges for his size. He does this by using his body to create highway screens or to seal and get into post position (70% PPP percentile in post-ups). Although he shot a paltry 16.2% on threes, I have confidence he can become a catch-and-shoot threat on his rookie scale deal due to his comfort with jumpers inside the arc, 72.4% from the FT line, and his lack of hesitancy to take open threes. Sorber is also a fantastic defender who can protect the rim to a high degree (opposing team’s rim FG% falls by 14% with Sorber on the floor and 7.6 BLK%) while also being able to switch in space (2.7 STL%).

For these reasons, Sorber is optimized more as a forward. Playing as a forward and his fit with the Hawks as a short-roll passer, positive rebounder, defender, and play finisher gives me optimism that Sorber would be a tremendous match for the Hawks.

Roshan Potluri

23. Indiana Pacers – Nique Clifford, Colorado State

The Pacers can always use more quality wing play and Clifford brings that. He’s improved his offensive skillset over the years, diversifying his attack and adding new skills to his box of tools. He’ll add much needed size and defensive prowess to Indiana’s perimeter defense as well.

Ben Pfeifer

24. Oklahoma City Thunder – Miles Byrd, San Diego State

The Thunder net their second wing of the draft in Miles Byrd, who stands at 6-foot-6 with a 7-foot wingspan. Byrd was one of the best wing defenders in college basketball last season, applying his length to produce a 4.9% block rate and 4.3% steal rate while grading out as the best defender on a top-20 defense. Alongside his high steal rate, his high feel is evidenced by an 18.5% assist rate and 1.7 assist-to-turnover ratio, rounding him out as a quintessential “Presti-player”. While his shot hasn’t come around yet (30% 3PT), high volume (12 attempts per 100 possessions and 57 three-point rate), great touch (83% FT), and impressive midrange shotmaking (38% on non-rim 2s) at a true sophomore age promise three-point shooting down the line. The main issue lies in his closeout attacking, where his handle easily clears the threshold but terrible finishing (55%) crushes any potential there and limits his overall offensive ceiling.

Maurya Kumpatla

25. Orlando Magic – Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

Tahaad Pettiford brings downhill explosiveness, quick first step burst, soft finishing touch, pull-up 3pt shooting range, and two-way feel to a team that needs it. A guard that can penetrate the paint, attack the rim, kick out to shooters, score and shoot the rock who can hold his own defensively would see a warm welcome in Orlando. He’ll have opportunity to develop as Orlando continues building a perennial playoff contender, where maybe the Magic won’t need to make a splashy trade if they can nail the right complementary guard to their core in the draft.

Ryan Kaminski

26. Brooklyn Nets – Ben Saraf, ULM

Saraf is a downhill menace at 6’5” who can apply both rim pressure (6.3 rim attempts per 36 minutes) and midrange pressure (3.8 pull-up twos per 36 minutes) while being one of the best distributors in class. Saraf looks like an ideal back up point guard in waiting, with outside shooting concerns holding back his starter likelihood. But productivity across the court – his 4% offensive rebound rate, 2.7% steal rate and 1.3% block rate are all strong for a guard – signal he knows how to play. A proven contributor at only recently turned 19 for the second-place team in the highly competitive German league.

Matt Powers

27. Brooklyn Nets – Bogoljub Markovic, KK Mega

Another up-and-coming bet from the European leagues, Markovic can stretch the floor to complement Saraf’s probing. At 6’11” with a pristine shooting form, Markovic cashed 40% of his catch and shoot three point attempts. That’s bankable at the next level, especially for a Brooklyn Nets team that was in the 97th percentile for catch and shoot frequency. Markovic has questionable ball skills, a good passer but poor decisionmaker at this current stage. But it is encouraging how open he is to trying things: while the creation outcome is unlikely, we cannot rule it out. His primary defensive contribution will be rebounding, at a 22% rate this season, and general effort, hampered by a mere +1 wingspan. The Nets have time to let young players experiment, and Markovic has as interesting of a foundation as anyone left on the board.

Matt Powers

28. Boston Celtics – Nate Bittle, Oregon

Nate Bittle is 7 feet tall with a reported 7’5 WS, he can shoot threes, and he was named to the Big Ten’s All-Defense team. 7 footers who make assists more than turnovers with non-terrible steal rates are rare enough, but I’ll save you the querying: there has never been a single 7-foot prospect who rebounds, blocks, avoids turnovers, and shoots the way Bittle does. The league is built on outliers!

Sure, this phrase is often weaponized as copium for some iteration of a highly unaesthetic, high-friction archetype that hemorrhages points through either 3 or D. But in this case, a 7 footer with these extreme strengths projects to be an incredibly low-friction bet that should be able to contribute regardless of context. It seriously doesn’t take much imagination to project Bittle’s offensive viability, especially on a team like the Celtics who have personnel (two of the league’s best 7 foot+ shooters in Luke Kornet and Kristaps Porzingis) and schematic precedent to maximize Bittle’s goodness.

Avinash Chauhan

29. Phoenix Suns – Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

Phoenix desperately needs good basketball players in any form and Darrion Williams fits that description. Williams presents one of the better dribble-pass-shoot bets on the wing in this class, bringing the on-and-off-ball versatility Phoenix would covet. He’s a sturdy defender as well who would likely be one of the Suns’ better players as a rookie.

Ben Pfeifer

30. Los Angeles Clippers – Alex Condon, Florida

The Los Angeles Clippers should consider drafting Alex Condon in the 2025 NBA Draft due to his versatile skillset and fit with their roster needs. At 6’11”, Condon offers the flexibility to play both power forward and center, addressing the team’s lack of frontcourt depth beyond Ivica Zubac. His modern big-man skills— including low-post scoring, developing three-point shooting, and exceptional playmaking with a 2.2 assist-to-turnover ratio—complement the Clippers’ need for a dynamic, facilitating big who can operate in dribble handoffs and keep the offense flowing alongside stars like James Harden and Norman Powell. Defensively, his lateral quickness and rim protection potential make him a solid fit for switching schemes, while his high basketball IQ and work ethic suggest he can develop into a reliable rotation player. With the Clippers aiming to bolster their frontcourt for a championship push, Condon’s two-way upside makes him a compelling mid-to-late first-round target.

Larry Golden

31. Minnesota Timberwolves – Sion James, Duke

Joe Hulbert

32. Boston Celtics – Liam McNeeley, Connecticut

Larry Golden

33. Charlotte Hornets – Javon Small, West Virginia

Ahmed Jama

34. Charlotte Hornets – Walter Clayton Jr., Florida

Ahmed Jama

35. Philadelphia Sixers – Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

Tyler Wilson

36. Brooklyn Nets – Johni Broome, Auburn

Matt Powers

37. Detroit Pistons – Isaiah Evans, Duke

Roshan Potluri

38. San Antonio Spurs – Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

Maurya Kumpatla

39. Toronto Raptors – Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

Ryan Kaminski

40. Washington Wizards – Rasheer Fleming, Saint Joseph’s

Joe Hulbert

41. Golden State Warriors – Rocco Zikarsky, Brisbane

Tyler Wilson

42. Sacramento Kings – Boogie Fland, Arkansas

Larry Golden

43. Utah Jazz – Drake Powell, North Carolina

Corban Ford

44. Oklahoma City Thunder – Max Shulga, VCU

Roshan Potluri

45. Chicago Bulls – Will Riley, Illinois

Avinash Chauhan

46. Orlando Magic – Vladislav Goldin, Michigan

Ryan Kaminski

47. Milwaukee Bucks – Koby Brea, Kentucky

Larry Golden

48. Memphis Grizzlies – Egor Demin, BYU

Matt Powers

49. Cleveland Cavaliers – Cedric Coward, Washington State

Maurya Kumpatla

50. New York Knicks – Mark Sears, Alabama

Tyler Wilson

51. Los Angeles Clippers – Tyrese Proctor, Duke

Corban Ford

52. Phoenix Suns – Eric Dixon, Villanova

Avinash Chauhan

53. Utah Jazz – Alex Toohey, Sydney

Larry Golden

54. Indiana Pacers – Jamir Watkins, Florida State

Ben Pfeifer

55. Los Angeles Lakers – Joan Beringer, Olimpija

Roshan Potluri

56. Memphis Grizzlies – Karter Knox, Arkansas

Matt Powers

57. Orlando Magic – Otega Oweh, Kentucky

Ryan Kaminski

58. Cleveland Cavaliers – Hunter Sallis, Wake Forest

Corban Ford

59. Houston Rockets – AK Okereke, Cornell

Maurya Kumpatla

The post 2025 NBA Mock Draft 3.0 appeared first on Swish Theory.

For our most recent mock draft, featuring written explanations for each pick, go here.

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke

Do-it-all wing with premium skill and athleticism

2. Dylan Harper, Rutgers

Bruising driving guard and potent scorer

3. Collin Murray-Boyles, South Carolina

Elite playmaking forward on both sides of the ball

4. VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

Explosive scoring guard and lockdown defender

5. Khaman Maluach, Duke

Towering young big with upside as a play finisher and rim protector

6. Derik Queen, Maryland

Creative big-bodied drive threat who can pass

7. Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

Young lead guard with dribble, pass, shoot upside

8. Ace Bailey, Rutgers

Versatile shooting wing with dynamic athleticism

9. Tre Johnson, Texas

Tough shotmaker all over the court

10. Jase Richardson, Michigan State

Three-level scoring guard with quick processing

11. Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

Pull-up maestro with passing creativity

12. Kon Knueppel, Duke

Three-point sniper with shooting versatility and P&R playmaking chops

13. Asa Newell, Georgia

Versatile defender, glass-crashing post-up threat developing three point shot

14. Noa Essengue, ULM

Sinewy rim attacker with budding ball skills and defensive versatility

15. Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

Tough freshman PF with strong feel for the game

16. Noah Penda, Le Mans

Menacing wing defender and offensive connector

17. Labaron Philon, Alabama

Gadgety, versatile, productive guard every team could use

18. Miles Byrd, San Diego State

Stocks machine with shooting potential

19. Ben Saraf, ULM

Best passer in class as a game managing point guard and scorer

20. Bennett Stirtz, Drake

Potentially underrated lead guard up-transfer from Division II

21. Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

Quick first-step point guard who is a willing shooter and active defender

22. Nique Clifford, Colorado State

Fluid-moving upperclassman who does a little of everything

23. Kam Jones, Marquette

Paint touch machine, three-level scorer who can pass

24. Rasheer Fleming, Saint Joseph’s

Big wing who can shoot with a 7’5” wingspan

25. Johni Broome, Auburn

Versatile playmaking forward as one of best NCAA players in the country

26. Danny Wolf, Michigan

Unique ball-handling point center with quick processing skills

27. Liam McNeeley, Connecticut

Three-point threat who attacks closeouts looking to finish strong

28. Carter Bryant, Arizona

Talented freshman wing providing a punch off the bench

29. Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

Big man upperclassman who dominates the paint on both ends

30. JT Toppin, Texas Tech

High motor, high producing rim attacker

31. Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

Elbow/post hub with a well-rounded driving game and plus passing

32. Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

Point-of-attack demon with some ball skills

33. Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

Dribble-pass-shoot quick small guard

34. Will Riley, Illinois

Under-developed young wing shooter and passer

35. Adou Thiero, Arkansas

Physical slasher who creates events on defense

36. Joshua Jefferson, Iowa State

Physical defender with some connector chops as a big wing

37. Egor Demin, BYU

Elite passer with inconsistent play against top competition

38. Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

Skilled upperclassman who can shoot and pass from the wing

39. Alex Condon, Florida

Sharp-passing sophomore big who can grease an offense and get stocks

40. Walter Clayton Jr.

High volume three point shooter who can do some guard things

41. JoJo Tugler, Houston

+12 wingspan for this mobile rim protector

42. Boogie Fland, Arkansas

Game managing shooter and passer

43. Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

Toolsy high motor player with versatility

44. Flory Bidunga, Kansas

Undersized but hyper-athletic rangy big

45. Alex Karaban, Connecticut

Elite shooter and wing defender, national champion

46. Dailyn Swain, Xavier

Sparks of dribble-pass-shoot ability for this athletic wing

47. Javon Small, West Virginia

Highly productive lead guard essential to WVU

48. Rocco Zikarsky, Brisbane

18-year-old with a chance to be best rim protector in class

49. Ian Jackson, North Carolina

Pure scoring freshman who can catch fire like few others

50. Bogoljub Markovic, KK Mega

Astounding rebounder with some intriguing movement skills at 6’11”

51. Drake Powell, North Carolina

Hyperactive freshman defender with shooting potential

52. Tomislav Ivisic, Illinois

Floor-spacing center and ball-mover

53. Chad Baker-Mazara, Auburn

Upperclassman utility wing with a smooth shot

54. Zvonimir Ivisic, Arkansas

PNR roll & pop 7’2” big

55. Max Shulga, VCU

Strong combo guard who can run some PNR

56. Xaivian Lee, Princeton

Shifty guard who can table set and let it fly from deep

57. Alvaro Folgueiras, Robert Morris

Ultra-versatile big wing hiding in mid majors

58. Eric Dixon, Villanova

Pure shooting 6’8” upperclassman, one of best players in NCAA

59. Otega Oweh, Kentucky

Tough-nosed defender and transition threat

The post 2025 NBA Draft Big Board 2.0 appeared first on Swish Theory.

This one is a no-brainer. Flagg is a special prospect, capable of instantly changing the fortunes of any team that selects him. Washington is the fortunate one here, landing their future primary initiator and defensive leader. Flagg helps round out their already promising young core, adding a true superstar prospect to the mix.

– Ben Pfeifer

2. Charlotte Hornets: Collin Murray-Boyles, South Carolina

As a sophomore, Collin Murray-Boyles has boosted both efficiency (82nd percentile to 83rd percentile) and frequency (65th percentile to 70th percentile) as a post-up hub, possesses a burgeoning perimeter isolation game (88th percentile efficiency on 88th percentile frequency), and is a dominant passer in a variety of situations (career 19.8% AST and 1.2 A:TO). With elite offensive production regardless of usage, team context, and opponent difficulty as a young sophomore, Murray-Boyles has all the ingredients of an offensive star. Pair that potential with incredible defensive production, baseline touch, and outlier development indicators galore, and he has endless avenues to impact even if the offensive stardom doesn’t manifest. For a Charlotte team that ranks 29th in offense and 19th in defense, Murray-Boyles brings an integration of both offense and defense that lags behind only Cooper Flagg.

– Maurya Kumpatla

3. Utah Jazz: Dylan Harper, Rutgers

Dylan Harper has established himself as one of the clear-cut top prospects in the 2025 class, combining ideal size for a ball-handler with the ability to generate consistent paint touches via advanced footwork and elite body control. He’s had to handle huge creation responsibility on a Rutgers team devoid of much shooting or ball handling to surround him, and has still managed to be efficient (59% TS%) in spite of that. The biggest question/swing skill with Harper is how well he’ll shoot it at the NBA level, but his percentages (35% 3pt, 74% FT) are respectable enough that you have to imagine that he’ll at least be a decent shooter. Even with Isaiah Collier showing promise as a lead ball-handler in his rookie year, Harper is too good of a prospect to pass up at #3.

– AJ Carter

4. New Orleans Pelicans: Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

The Pelicans underwent a pseudo youth movement and Jakucionis will only add to it. They’ve needed more high-end playmaking for Zion Williamson’s entire career, making Jakucionis a perfect fit here. His shooting provides a tantalizing ceiling on the ball and will help him space and cut next to Williamson.

– Ben Pfeifer

5. Toronto Raptors: Khaman Maluach, Duke

Khaman Maluach is a monster. With a true shooting percentage over 70, Maluach is one of the most efficient players in his role in the entire country, despite being introduced to the game of basketball later in life. With fewer years of experience, it is fair to expect some growing pains and there certainly have been some this season at Duke. What has impressed me most throughout the year is not Maluach’s freaky athleticism, true center size, overwhelming offensive rebounding or hyper-efficient scoring, it has been the rate at which he has improved throughout the college season. Playing the five in the NBA will take some refining, it is the most difficult (and important) defensive role on the court, and few players walk into the league ready to do so. With Maluach’s physical tools, potential touch and competitiveness he has all the tools to be a true building block for Toronto. It is hard to imagine a more perfect mentor than Jakob Poeltl as he learns the ropes of NBA defense.

– Tyler Wilson

6. Philadelphia 76ers: Asa Newell, Georgia

Asa checks many boxes for this Sixers team, fitting cleanly at the 4 in the starting lineup and providing a reliable backup 5 option behind Embiid. The strengths of Newell’s game complement this team between his pinpoint offensive rebounding, frontcourt defensive versatility, helpside shot blocking, catch-and-shoot 3pt shooting potential, and the ability to attack closeouts with the shot or pumpfake, drive, and post-up hook. Newell slides right into the starting unit without taking touches from the star scorers and will produce as a positionless defender and off-ball play finisher.

– Ryan Kaminski

7. Brooklyn Nets: VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

VJ Edgecombe has managed to alleviate many concerns brought about by his early season play by consistently shooting the ball from distance (39.5% from 3 in conference play), while increasing both his volume and efficiency as a driver. Despite Edgecombe’s becoming more heavily featured within the Baylor offense, his defensive effort and production has seldom waned. This effort and production has come even though Edgecombe has been cast in a variety of roles and schemes as Baylor constantly tinkered to compensate for the lack of size in their rotation. The schematic inconsistencies have managed to provide a glimpse of how Edgecombe could be deployed as a ‘utility guard’, an archetype which has recently come into vogue and has in many ways defined the best defenses in the NBA over the past few years. Combining the versatile defensive ability with an increasingly potent offense has made Edgecombe a no-brainer pick at this juncture of the draft.

– Ahmed Jama

8. Chicago Bulls: Jase Richardson, Michigan State

The 6’3 quick guard can score at all levels, threatening teams with his feathery touch, feel, and footwork. At pick #8, Richardson was the perfect player for the Chicago Bulls to add to their young core and build on their halfcourt creation. Jase Richardson can hold up defensively for a small guard while being an extremely role-malleable offensive player. The bet for the Bulls is that Richardson’s shot-making inside the arc continues to evolve and translate further beyond the arc, enabling him to keep up with a higher usage role in the long term. In the short term, the Chicago Bulls play with a high transition frequency under Coach Billy Donovan which is a perfect fit with how effective Richardson is in the open-court.

– Roshan Potluri

9. San Antonio Spurs: Ace Bailey, Rutgers

Ace Bailey would be a strong pick for the San Antonio Spurs due to his exceptional shot-making ability and positional size at 6-foot-10, offering a high-ceiling wing who can create his own offense alongside Victor Wembanyama and De’Aaron Fox. His scoring versatility and length could complement the Spurs’ growing core, adding a dynamic perimeter threat to elevate their attack.

– Larry Golden

10. San Antonio Spurs: Derik Queen, Maryland

Derik Queen brings a positionally unique form of advantage creation as a post-hub passer with off-the-dribble shooting upside. Still, his offensive versatility is paired with limited defensive versatility: he’s at the horrid intersection of poor lateral quickness, poor vertical explosion, and underwhelming center size. There isn’t a better fit for this type of offensively tilted, defensively limited PF/C than alongside Victor Wembanyama, potentially the most transcendent two-way center in NBA history.

– Avinash Chauhan

11. Portland Trailblazers: Noa Essengue, ULM

The Portland Trailblazers get one of the youngest players and higher upside propositions in the 2025 NBA Draft at pick #11. Noa Essengue fits what Portland is building with its group of rangy defenders and strong interior presence. At 6’10, Essengue is a versatile defensive player who can operate out of the point-of-attack, back-line, or general help situations. Offensively, Essengue has been dominant in transition and applying physicality in the half-court for Ulm in the German BBL this season, and that can immediately translate to the NBA. While the shooting and strength are still a work in progress, Essengue has been improving these traits at a drastic rate enabling him to be someone who can attack off the catch consistently during his rookie-scale deal.

– Roshan Potluri

12. Houston Rockets: Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

While it was tough to pass up Tre Johnson, I liked the idea of Sorber within this group of exciting young players even more. The idea is somewhat like why they brought Steven Adams in, to provide a physical interior presence, good screening and strong passing. Sorber might eventually shoot it, too, with a smooth form and solid free throw and midrange percentages for a big.

– Matt Powers

13. Atlanta Hawks: Tre Johnson, Texas

Tre Johnson has had one of the most impressive scoring seasons from a high-major freshman in recent memory. Posting a 6.5 Offensive Box Plus-Minus in conference play, second amongst freshmen and only trailing Cooper Flagg, Johnson has ameliorated many concerns of how quickly his game would translate to the most difficult conference in the country. Despite shouldering a massive 27% usage rate, Johnson has managed to adapt and make significant progress both as a facilitator and driver, consistently elevating his rim-rate over the course of the season without detracting from his efficiency. Johnson’s malleability as an offensive player bodes well to his professional career, as his ability to synergize with more interior based scorers will be crucial considering Johnson’s defensive limitations.

– Ahmed Jama

14. Utah Jazz: Kon Knueppel, Duke

For teams looking for shooting on the wing, Kon is one of the premier shotmakers in this year’s draft. He lacks much explosiveness or burst as an athlete, but has strong positional size and is a skilled scorer from every part of the court. Kon is a knockdown shooter off the catch but has more variety to his shotmaking than just that, showing the ability to make pull-ups off the dribble or use his size to carve out space for short jumpers. It remains to be seen how well he’ll be able to survive on defense at the NBA level, but offensively Kon has one of the most translatable skillsets in the draft.

– AJ Carter

15. Orlando Magic: Danny Wolf, Michigan

Have you seen this guy play basketball? Danny Wolf is a grab-and-go seven-foot offensive hub diming up defenses on fast breaks and pick and rolls. Wolf flashes exciting handles, natural point center vision, and incredible feel for the game, hitting highlight pull-up threes and tough finishing touch shots at the rim. Danny makes good reads as a primary decision maker reacting to defenses, averaging 1.01 PPP on “P&R including passes” that ranks in the 84th percentile of all college players.

– Ryan Kaminski

16. Oklahoma City Thunder: Noah Penda, Le Mans

Noah Penda’s integration of length (6-foot-11 wingspan), strength (225 lbs), instincts, and hand-eye coordination have led him to a league-leading blocks total and 2nd-best steals totals as just a 20-year-old in the French Jeep Elite, giving him an argument for best non-big defender in the class. For an Oklahoma City Thunder scheme that’s already historic at forcing turnovers and boasts rim protection from each position, Penda adds even more value. Though he brings shooting and finishing question marks, he’s on a special developmental trajectory as a shooter, and his monster offensive rebounding-assists-stocks integration promises further room for growth.

– Maurya Kumpatla

17. Dallas Mavericks: Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

The idea of Kyrie Irving mentoring Fears is too appealing to pass up, but Fears is easily my best on the board at this point. Much like why I drafted him to the Nets in our prior mock draft, Fears has some of the best dribble-pass-shoot upside in the class, carrying a heavy burden for Oklahoma at age 18. It’s tough to find primary upside this late, but the Mavs do here.

– Matt Powers

18. Oklahoma City Thunder: Bennett Stirtz, Drake

Bennett Stirtz is one of the best volume pick-and-roll scorers in all of college basketball, fusing pace, a tight handle, and shotmaking from every area on the court to power 87th percentile pick-and-roll ballhandler efficiency on 99th percentile frequency. He pairs this scoring with best-in-the-class feel, blending visual manipulation with a wide range of deliveries to produce a 35% assist rate and engine a top-40 Drake halfcourt offense. All this makes him an underrated creation bet, but a 47% catch-and-shoot jumpshot and tons of driving production give him a strong dribble/pass/shoot wing base. His footspeed on defense in such a role would be worrisome, but his strong feel and hand-eye coordination that leads to defensive playmaking (3.6% steal rate) would fit like a glove in Oklahoma City.

– Maurya Kumpatla

19. Miami Heat: Dailyn Swain, Xavier

At pick #19, the Miami Heat select Dailyn Swain: the young sophomore forward with creative ball-handling and lock-down defense out of Xavier. Standing at 6’8, Swain fits the Heat’s culture of players who play with a motor and a sense of toughness, which exudes itself in how Swain consistently impacts games in the most opportunistic ways. The impact is seen without needing to play on the ball at Xavier – Swain runs the break hard in transition, keeps the ball moving in the halfcourt, and is always hustling on the boards. That energy, with his size and length, translates to the defensive end where he can cover ground well and excel in lock and trail situations. While the defense and feel on the offensive end will keep him on the court early on, the Heat will need to improve Swain’s two-motion jumper for Swain to hit any form of creation upside. However, in the middle of the first round, Swain’s combination of age, size, burst, feel, flexibility, and handling comfort makes him a worthy proposition for a retooling Heat team.

– Roshan Potluri

20. Minnesota Timberwolves: Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

With Mike Conley’s decline Minnesota has a clear need for long-term ball-handling/shot creation outside of Anthony Edwards. While 2024 draft pick Rob Dillingham is an obvious candidate to fill a lot of that responsibility in coming years, it wouldn’t hurt to take another swing on a potential creator. Traore has slid down draft boards after being a preseason potential top 5 pick candidate due to a lack of efficiency and consistency, but outside of the lottery it’s hard to find players with more upside than Traore. Despite struggles this season he still has the talent to be a dynamic creator off the dribble if he can improve as a shotmaker and make smarter decisions with the ball.

– AJ Carter

21. Indiana Pacers: Ben Saraf, ULM

Rick Carlisle loves guards, and Saraf gives the Pacers another dribble-drive-pass threat. The three-point shot is poor off the dribble but acceptable off the catch. At a strong 6’5” and still just 18, Saraf has the build and productivity of someone capable of handling bench primary duties. Perhaps the single best passer in the class.

– Matt Powers

22. Brooklyn Nets: Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

Kalkbrenner’s brand of mistake-free basketball, characterized by foul and TO avoidance, is inherently low friction, and his sheer size (7’5 WS + 250 lbs) with relative mobility gives him a fairly high floor as a defender.  He’s exhibited NBA-caliber dominance since his sophomore year, and he’s slowly increased his 3P rate while consistently shooting over 70% FT for his college career. With much more room to err and experiment on the rebuilding Nets, Kalk’s collegiate extent of dominance may persist more than one would expect with a typical four-year center.

– Avinash Chauhan

23. Brooklyn Nets: Carter Bryant, Arizona

You don’t see too many bulky, athletic forwards take over half their shots from beyond 3P, but at 6’8, 225 pounds, Carter has a whopping 0.60 3P rate while remaining hyper-efficient inside the arc (14 of his 37 2P makes are dunks). The upside with Carter lies within his pull up game: in interviews, he consistently cites players like Tatum and Paul George as personal exemplars, and his AAU playtype distribution was littered with far too many pullups and PnR BH possessions. While his production and processing (7.6 BPM, 6% block, 3% steal, 1 A:TO) give him a reasonably high floor, it’s Carter’s tantalizing combination of youth, size, and shooting proclivity that could unlock true star upside.

– Avinash Chauhan

24. Atlanta Hawks: Liam McNeeley, Connecticut

This was an easy selection, and I would imagine Atlanta would be pretty stoked to draft someone at 24 who is all but a guaranteed NBA rotation player. McNeeley gets it in more ways than one. He is a surprisingly effective defensive rebounder despite his physical limitations, he makes quick decisions on and off the ball, and (somewhat surprisingly) has shown the ability to handle a larger offensive load than he did in high school playing on one of the most stacked teams in recent memory. McNeeley will present some questions defensively, but he should be able to slide into lineups featuring both Dyson Daniels and Jalen Johnson easily. He’s only hit ~35% of his threes this season, but don’t let that deceive you, McNeeley is one of the premier off-ball weapons in this class.

– Tyler Wilson

25. Washington Wizards: Labaron Philon, Alabama

Philon was by far the best player available, but he’s a logical fit for a Washington team still looking for high-end talent. The Alabama freshman is a quick, shifty guard who pressures the rim and passes at a high level. He could develop into a valuable connector piece for a Wizards team that just added Cooper Flagg.

– Ben Pfeifer

26. Orlando Magic: Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

Tahaad Pettiford brings downhill explosiveness, quick first step burst, soft finishing touch, pull-up 3pt shooting range, and two-way feel to a team that needs it. A guard that can penetrate the paint, attack the rim, kick out to shooters, score and shoot the rock who can hold his own defensively would see a warm welcome in Orlando. He’ll have opportunity to develop as Orlando continues building a perennial playoff contender, where maybe the Magic won’t need to make a splashy trade if they can nail the right complementary guard to their core in the draft.

– Ryan Kaminski

27. Brooklyn Nets: Kam Jones, Marquette

Kam Jones would be a strong pick for the Brooklyn Nets due to his proven scoring ability and playmaking skills, averaging over 20 points and 6 assists per game at Marquette, which could bolster their backcourt during a rebuild. His experience as a senior guard, combined with his improved shooting and passing, makes him a ready-made contributor who could thrive in Brooklyn’s system under Jordi Fernández.

– Larry Golden

28. Boston Celtics: Rasheer Fleming, St. Joseph’s

Fleming is a bit of a divisive selection as a lower-usage upperclassman playing in the A10, but at pick #28 the positives are too hard to ignore. He has been massive for St. Joe’s this year, shooting over 70% at the rim and 41% from three. In an era of NBA basketball where efficient shots are valued more than ever, Fleming is an easy bet to score in the most valuable areas of the court. His block, steal and rebounding numbers are all positive and point towards a genuine contributor on the defensive side of the ball as a powerful forward with the ability to play some small-ball five. If Boston truly “needs” anything in the draft, it is cost-controlled production. Fleming should provide real value on his rookie deal as an older prospect with the frame and complementary skillet to produce immediately. 

– Tyler Wilson

29. Los Angeles Clippers: Nique Clifford, Colorado State

Nique Clifford to the Los Angeles Clippers would be great because of his versatility as a 6-foot-6 guard bringing defensive flexibility and rebounding tenacity, addressing the team’s need for depth on the wing alongside stars like Kawhi Leonard and James Harden. His senior-year performance at Colorado State—averaging 15.6 points, 9.7 rebounds, and 2.8 assists on efficient shooting—shows he could provide immediate contributions as a role player for the Clips.

– Larry Golden

30. Phoenix Suns: Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

It is unclear in which direction the Suns want to go, and Ant gives them options. His POA defense is NBA-ready, a thief ready to pounce at any moment. The best player on a top-20 team in the nation as a sophomore, Robinson is able to do important things on the court. He is the team leader in assists who has also shown outside shooting potential with 42% from three, 49% from midrange and 77% from the line splits. Despite being only 6’3”, Ant’s reported 6’7” wingspan makes him more dangerous in passing lanes or snagging the errant offensive board. His 0.78 free throw rate reiterates his level of physicality, NBA ready despite the skinny frame.

– Matt Powers

31. Boston Celtics: Johni Broome, Auburn

32. Charlotte Hornets: Miles Byrd, San Diego State

33. Minnesota Timberwolves: Flory Bidunga, Kansas

34. Charlotte Hornets: Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

35. Detroit Pistons: Paul McNeil, NC State

36. Philadelphia 76ers: Adou Thiero, Arkansas

37. Brooklyn Nets: Javon Small, West Virginia

38. Sacramento Kings: Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

39. San Antonio Spurs: Chad Baker-Mazara, Auburn

40. Toronto Raptors: Eric Dixon, Villanova

41. Oklahoma City Thunder: Joshua Jefferson, Iowa State

42. Washington Wizards: Egor Demin, BYU

43. Orlando Magic: Boogie Fland, Arkansas

44. Golden State Warriors: JoJo Tugler, Houston

45. Chicago Bulls: Max Shulga, VCU

46. Los Angeles Clippers: Walter Clayton Jr., Florida

47. Utah Jazz: Alex Toohey, Sydney

48. Washington Wizards: Nate Bittle, Oregon

49. Utah Jazz: Tyrese Proctor, Duke

50. Washington Wizards: JT Toppin, Texas Tech

51. Cleveland Cavaliers: Nolan Winter, Wisconsin

52. Indiana Pacers: Alex Condon, Florida

53. Memphis Grizzlies: Isaiah Evans, Duke

54. Los Angeles Lakers: Curtis Jones, Iowa State

55. New York Knicks: Terrance Arceneaux, Houston

56. Phoenix Suns: Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

57. Orlando Magic: Otega Oweh, Kentucky

58. Houston Rockets: Rocco Zikarsky

59. Cleveland Cavaliers: Braden Smith, Purdue

The post 2025 NBA Mock Draft 2.0 appeared first on Swish Theory.

Do-it-all wing with premium skill and athleticism

2. Dylan Harper, Rutgers

Bruising driving guard and potent scorer

3. Khaman Maluach, Duke

Towering young big with upside as a play finisher and rim protector

4. VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

Explosive scoring guard and lockdown defender

5. Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

Pull-up maestro with passing creativity

6. Collin Murray-Boyles, South Carolina

Elite playmaking forward on both sides of the ball

7. Ace Bailey, Rutgers

Versatile shooting wing with dynamic athleticism

8. Derik Queen, Maryland

Creative big-bodied drive threat who can pass

9. Tre Johnson, Texas

Versatile scoring, smooth three point shooting bucket-getter

10. Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

Tough freshman PF with strong feel for the game

11. Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

Young lead guard with dribble, pass, shoot upside

12. Noa Essengue, ULM

Sinewy rim attacker with budding ball skills and defensive versatility

13. Asa Newell, Georgia

Versatile defender, glass-crashing post-up threat developing three point shot

14. Jase Richardson, Michigan State

Three-level scoring guard with quick processing

15. Labaron Philon, Alabama

Gadgety, versatile, productive guard every team could use

16. Ben Saraf, ULM

Best passer in class as a game managing point guard and scorer

17. Noah Penda, Le Mans

Menacing wing defender and offensive connector

18. Miles Byrd, San Diego State

Stocks machine with shooting potential

19. Kon Knueppel, Duke

Three point sniper with shooting versatility and P&R playmaking chops

20. Johni Broome, Auburn

Versatile playmaking forward as one of best NCAA players in the country

21. Kam Jones, Marquette

Paint touch machine, three-level scorer who can pass

22. Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

Quick first step point guard who is a willing shooter and active defender

23. Rasheer Fleming, Saint Joseph’s

Big wing who can shoot with a 7’5” wingspan

24. Egor Demin, BYU

Elite passer with inconsistent play against top competition

25. Liam McNeeley, Connecticut

Three point threat who attacks closeouts looking to finish strong

26. Danny Wolf, Michigan

Unique ball-handling point center with quick processing skills

27. Adou Thiero, Arkansas

Physical slasher who creates events on defense

28. Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

Skilled upperclassman who can shoot and pass from the wing

29. Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

Point-of-attack demon with some ball skills

30. Boogie Fland, Arkansas

Game managing shooter and passer out for season

31. Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

Toolsy high motor player with versatility

32. Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

Big man upperclassman who dominates the paint on both ends

33. Flory Bidunga, Kansas

Undersized but hyper-athletic rangy big

34. Alex Karaban, Connecticut

Elite shooter and wing defender, national champion

35. Will Riley, Illinois

Under-developed young wing shooter and passer

36. Rocco Zikarsky, Brisbane

18-year-old with a chance to be best rim protector in class

37. Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

Dribble-pass-shoot quick small guard

38. JT Toppin, Texas Tech

High motor, high producing rim attacker

39. Joshua Jefferson, Iowa State

Physical defender with some connector chops as a big wing

40. Ian Jackson, North Carolina

Pure scoring freshman who can catch fire like few others

41. Bennett Stirtz, Drake

Potentially underrated lead guard up-transfer from Division II

42. JoJo Tugler, Houston

+12 wingspan for this mobile rim protector

43. Nique Clifford, Colorado State

Fluid-moving upperclassman who does a little of everything

44. Chad Baker-Mazara, Auburn

Upperclassman utility wing with a smooth shot

45. Tomislav Ivisic, Illinois

Floor-spacing center and ball-mover

46. Carter Bryant, Arizona

Talented freshman wing providing a punch off the bench

47. KJ Lewis, Arizona

Aggressive defender with questions on offense

48. Dink Pate, Mexico City

18-year-old G Leaguer with a big body and flashes all over the court

49. Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

Elbow/post hub with a well-rounded driving game and plus passing

50. Bogoljub Markovic, KK Mega

Astounding rebounder with some intriguing movement skills at 6’11”

51. Xaivian Lee, Princeton

Shifty guard who can table set and let it fly from deep

52. Chaz Lanier, Tennessee

High volume shooter who rarely makes mistakes at age 23

53. Eric Dixon, Villanova

Pure shooting 6’8” upperclassman, one of best players in NCAA

54. Javon Small, West Virginia

Highly productive lead guard essential to WVU

55. Walter Clayton Jr.

High volume three point shooter who can do some guard things

56. Drake Powell, North Carolina

Hyperactive freshman defender with shooting potential

57. Alex Condon, Florida

Sharp-passing sophomore big who can grease and offense and get stocks

58. RJ Luis, Saint John’s

Dynamic athlete scorer

59. Milan Momcilovic

Unblockable shot for this 6’8” 40% three point shooter

The post 2025 NBA Draft Big Board 1.0 appeared first on Swish Theory.

1. Washington Wizards: Cooper Flagg, Duke

Cooper Flagg is a primary offensive option, one of the best defensive players in the country, leading a top ten team as a true 18-year-old freshman after being the highest-rated American High School prospect since… Anthony Davis? Yet somehow the discourse surrounding him to start the year has developed a negative tint. This is a special prospect, even if he doesn’t become the literal reincarnation of LeBron James. Two-way forwards do not grow on trees and their importance to playoff basketball cannot be understated. A foundation of Cooper Flagg and Bilal Coulibaly is an ideal starting point for building a roster meant for May and June. While Washington might not have your typical “star creator” on the roster they are not in a place to be drafting for context at the top of the draft. These kinds of players are worth their weight in gold, and the Wizards are running to the bank.

– Tyler Wilson

2. New Orleans Pelicans: Dylan Harper, Rutgers

Dylan Harper is a natural scoring creator with legitimate two-way feel; Dylan dices up defenses with ease. Harper consistently creates good looks for himself and his teammates, forces turnovers on defense, plays with a grab-and-go pace, and scores tough shots at every level. Dylan’s downhill explosiveness jumps off the page with incredible body control to decelerate, finish at the rim, draw fouls, and kick out to open shooters. Dylan looks like this draft class’ best primary halfcourt offensive engine who can create good looks for the team every time down the floor. With Zion, Herb Jones, and Trey Murphy flanking him in the frontcourt, adding Dylan Harper to the mix opens up the Pelicans’ options to build around this exciting walking bucket.

– Ryan Kaminski

3. Utah Jazz: Derik Queen, Maryland

The 6’10 Derik Queen will go to the Utah Jazz in the upcoming NBA Draft, and it’s easy to see why. His exceptional skillset makes him a highly coveted player for any team, but especially for the Jazz at this point in the draft. With a blend of feel, versatility, and impressive court vision, Queen can impact games in multiple facets. The ability to grab the ball off the glass and show off how comfortable he is as a ball handler in the open floor will be a headache for teams. Coaches can deploy him in delay actions, chin, dribble handoffs as the operator and trust him to make the right reads. The potential of having a pair as skilled as Lauri Markkanen and Queen could lead to not only fun for fans, but also wins.

– Larry Golden

4. Toronto Raptors: Collin Murray-Boyles, South Carolina

Despite having played this season in relative obscurity compared to other highly touted draft prospects, Collin Murray-Boyles has made significant developments to his game which should see him garner heavy consideration at the top of the class. During Murray-Boyles’ freshman campaign he played a more complementary role for South Carolina and thrived as a play finisher and opportunistic playmaker. So far this season, Murray-Boyles’ usage has been significantly scaled up and he’s gotten MORE efficient as a scorer. Of the 14 players in the country 6’7 or taller with over a 25% Usage Rate, Murray-Boyles possesses the highest True-Shooting% and the second-highest assist rate. What these statistical thresholds convey is Murray-Boyles’ presenting one of the most unique intersections of size and playmaking ability in the class. While I understand the Raptors’ faithful may have some consternation about Murray-Boyles’ fit with their resident jumbo-playmaker in Scottie Barnes, I believe this is a misguided thought for a team still seeking identity. At this phase of their team-building process the Raptors cannot afford to draft for fit and Murray-Boyles, in my estimation, is the best player remaining on the board.

– Ahmed Jama

5. Charlotte Hornets: Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

Charlotte secures their star big of the future with Thomas Sorber. A rotation of Mark Williams, Nick Richards, and Miles Bridges at center has resulted in three straight bottom-10 defensive seasons. Sorber’s 10.8% stock rate and +4.5 defensive BPM using physical dominance, feel, fluidity, and hand-eye coordination promise instant remedies. His athleticism, touch, and processing fit immediately as a play finisher with LaMelo Ball and as a dribble-handoff hub with Brandon Miller, while his massive offensive rebounding-stocks-assists integration (10.0% offensive rebound and 16.5% assist rates), tons of interior craft (78th percentile post-up efficiency), and ample shooting indicators dating back to high school (37.9% on non-rim twos and 71.6% on free-throws pre-NCAA) enable further pathways for development.

– Maurya Kumpatla

6. Portland Trailblazers: Ace Bailey, Rutgers

Portland is a team in an interesting spot, as they have a lot of intriguing younger players but lack a clear direction for their roster. Ace makes a lot of sense for them as arguably the best player available who also fits in nicely around some of their other core pieces with his length, shotmaking, and defensive upside. Portland would be a good landing spot for Ace as well, as they have enough ball handling and guard play to be able to ease him in offensively and let him work off the ball rather than overtasking him in a creator role.

– AJ Carter

7. Oklahoma City Thunder: VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

The OKC Thunder keep getting stronger, adding another top-10 pick to their already-loaded young core. As the No. 1 seed in the West, their defense has been a force, built on aggressively forcing turnovers through blocks and steals. Enter VJ Edgecombe, the only freshman to post a 5% mark in both steal and block rates—making him the perfect fit for this defensive juggernaut. Joining the Thunder gives him the ideal situation to showcase his defensive strengths while sharpening his offensive game. The Thunder’s guard room is stacked, but the chance to work on his shot with Chip Engelland and reduce driving turnovers in OKC’s spaced-out drive-and-kick offense should do wonders for VJ’s offensive development.

– Roshan Potluri

8. Brooklyn Nets: Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

Jeremiah Fears could lock up the Brooklyn Nets’ point guard position for the foreseeable future. The Oklahoma freshman has taken up huge usage (most in the SEC) despite only recently turning 18. There are few chances for heliocentric upside in this class, and Fears might have it with his dribble/pass/shoot potential and early returns. With patience, technique, and surprising strength beyond his years (he draws a TON of fouls), Fears will be a tough cover at any level. He’s not a pushover on defense, either, securing over two steals per game with limited fouling. The Nets could give Fears a long enough runway to see just how high that upside is.

– Matt Powers

9. Detroit Pistons: Asa Newell, Georgia

I’m aware this choice may feel somewhat controversial. Detroit was not a team I found terribly easy to draft for. I strongly considered Kasparas as an off-ball shotmaker alongside Cade, which I believe to be Kasparas’ ideal role. Newell is a guy I’m higher on than consensus, I buy the shooting relative to the numbers and the general scalability, which Detroit needs. They don’t have a tonne of long-term versatility within their core, and I buy Newell being able to slot in alongside whatever they want to do. He just feels like the exact type of player they need in the half-court and I buy Bickerstaff being a good coach for him, which matters.

– Joe Hulbert

10. Chicago Bulls: Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

It’s been a while since the Bulls have had a point guard who can make things happen in the halfcourt and create for their teammates consistently. Jakucionis is a 6’6 point guard with true star upside who flashes elite passing skills, pull-up shooting, and driving. In 177 possessions as the pick and roll ball handler he scores a 0.944 in PPP which is good enough for 64th percentile. The shooting off the dribble has been rock steady as he’s taken 36 and made 47%, even before arriving at Illinois it’s been a true strength of his which is a very desirable skill in the NBA. This would be a no-brainer pick for the Chicago Bulls.

– Larry Golden

11. Sacramento Kings: Liam McNeeley, UConn

A high volume 3pt sniper handoff extraordinaire who attacks closeouts with a myriad of tools, Liam McNeeley slides right into the Kings’ schemes. McNeeley brings 3-point shot versatility (C&S, pull-up, movement) and counters closeouts by attacking the rack looking to posterize anyone in his path. In Montverde’s loaded starting unit of Cooper Flagg, Asa Newell, Derik Queen, and Rob Wright, McNeeley would often end up the leading scorer as a floor-spacing play-finishing scoring valve who could heat up at any moment. Whether he’s backing up Malik Monk and Kevin Huerter or replacing them, McNeeley can fill a similar role playing off the strong screen DHO playmaking of Domantas Sabonis, whether De’Aaron Fox stays in town or not.

– Ryan Kaminski

12. San Antonio Spurs: Jase Richardson, Michigan State

Steering away from their affinity towards lengthy, athletic defensive-minded wings nets San Antonio one of the most well-polished offensive prospects in the class. Jase Richardson kills with productivity by extracting the most out of every touch; few can match his balanced shot distribution and monster offensive efficiency (74% true shooting and 3.7 assist-to-turnover ratio). His integration of versatile shooting, driving, and pristine decision-making gives him a high floor with tons of role malleability as a spot-up shooter and second-side creator. Still, Richardson has consistently scaled up production in games with higher doses of usage in a way that gives hope for untapped on-ball upside: he has a 74.5% true shooting in games with <15% usage versus 78.2% in games with >15% usage.

– Maurya Kumpatla

13. Atlanta Hawks: Tre Johnson, Texas

Atlanta already has several long-term pieces in place (Trae Young, Dyson Daniels, Jalen Johnson,  Zaccharie Risacher), and Tre Johnson looks the part of someone who has the versatility to complement all of them. He’s a ready-made shotmaker with high-end upside as a shooter, and he’s also shown flashes as a playmaker and on-ball defender. A fully developed version of Johnson would be a great fit in Atlanta as a do-it-all wing who can fit into a variety of roles while spacing the floor for Trae.

– AJ Carter

14. Oklahoma City Thunder: Noah Penda, Le Mans

In today’s NBA, you can never have too many dribble/pass/shoot wings, and that holds true even for the stacked OKC Thunder. Noah Penda brings the perfect blend of high feel, strength, and catch-and-shoot ability to thrive as a closeout creator in the Thunder’s offense. Where Penda truly stands out is on the defensive end, where he excels at creating turnovers both on the perimeter and as a weakside rim protector. This combination of skills on both ends of the floor should allow Penda to make an immediate impact for OKC, all while being under 21 for most of his rookie year.

– Roshan Potluri

15. Indiana Pacers: Johni Broome, Auburn

One of college basketball’s main storylines in the early season has been Auburn’s historically dominant start. Currently leading every major computer rating system while playing the most difficult schedule in the country, Johni Broome in many ways has been the catalyst for Auburn’s early-season heroics. Broome has oscillated between being the team’s defensive anchor and offensive fulcrum, similar to the previous season, while increasing his efficiency across the board. Broome’s all-encompassing impact on the best team in college basketball bodes well for his role in the league, where interchangeability is a necessary condition for reserve frontcourt players. And with Myles Turner’s impending free agency, the Pacers’ frontcourt composition is in a precarious state. Johni Broome could easily be integrated into a lineup with or without Turner, and coalesce with the other Pacer’s frontcourt players.

– Ahmed Jama

16. San Antonio Spurs: Kon Knueppel, Duke

The 19th-ranked offense Spurs double down on offensive bets here with Kon Knueppel, who is as pure of a shooter as you’ll find. He’s a lifetime 41% on threes, 84% on free throws, and 49% on non-rim twos across the EYBL and NCAA since 2020, making his shooting projection seamless. Knueppel pairs this shooting with high levels of ballhandling and feel, possessing a tight handle (9.7% turnover rate) with off-putting dribble cadences and being a quick processor (3.4 assist-to-turnover ratio), all of which coincide to make him an 88th percentile pick-and-roll ball handler in the country according to Synergy Sports. Athleticism and physicality are major concerns for Knueppel on both ends, but no team gives him the margins to succeed as the Spurs’ length and athleticism do.

– Maurya Kumpatla

17. Oklahoma City Thunder: Noa Essengue, Ulm

Noa Essengue will be 18.5 on draft night, making him an elite upside pick for the Thunder. With an established roster and a strong development staff, there’s no pressure for him to create in the half-court right away. Essengue has been a dominant force in transition, applying immense pressure on the rim with 34 dunks and a 0.77 free throw rate in the Basketball Bundesliga (25 games). At 6’10” with a reported 9’3.25” reach, Essengue is a pliable forward capable of both protecting the rim and stifling opponents at the point of attack. Despite being a teenager, Essengue shows great feel for the game which is evident in his 2% steal rate and 1.3 assist-to-turnover ratio. While his touch as a finisher still needs work, his 68.6% from the free-throw line and 30% three-point rate provide a strong foundation for improvement. With one of the NBA’s best shooting development staff, Essengue is well-positioned to refine his skills and develop into a special two-way player for the Thunder.

– Roshan Potluri

18. Golden State Warriors: Egor Demin, BYU

A quintessential Warriors player with his intersection of size and feel, if he were drafted this season Demin would be one of only four one-and-done freshmen above 6’7 to post above a 20% assist rate, the others being Anthony Black, RJ Barrett, Scottie Barnes, Cade Cunningham and Ben Simmons. Demin has acquitted himself extremely well exclusively running the point in BYU’s NBA-style offense. However, questions remain about whether he can sustain this production versus better competition, and how well his shooting will hold considering his mediocre priors. While these concerns are valid, what Demin’s demonstrated so far should portend well for a reduced role for a Golden State team in need of a two-way connector.

– Ahmed Jama

19. Houston Rockets: Khaman Maluach, Duke

The Rockets get one of the most impactful freshmen in the country at a relative value. Khaman Maluach has played a critical role in Duke’s nation-leading adjusted defensive efficiency while playing a remarkably mistake-free offensive role. Everything about Khaman’s game oozes physical dominance, starting with anthropometrics: he has 10-inch wide hands and a 9’8 standing reach, both of which would rank amongst the top of the league. Khaman is a force on the glass (15% offensive rebound rate), a wildly efficient scorer (81% true shooting), and he’s showcased an uncanny ability to both draw fouls (0.60 free throw rate) and limit possession obstruction (< 4 fouls/40 + 11% TO). He even demonstrates some semblance of touch, shooting 80% from the line. Khaman and his anti-foul rim protection style should seamlessly slot into Ime Udoka’s stifling defensive scheme. There are certainly pertinent concerns regarding Khaman’s feel, but this is the type of high-upside, immediate-production selection that the surging Rockets should be looking to make.

– Avinash Chauhan

20. Utah Jazz: Boogie Fland, Arkansas

Boogie is one of the best guards in this draft class. The burst off the dribble is truly something to watch while he’s on the floor. This is a guard who can create and get into the paint without a screen and show off his touch with his floater or make the reads necessary to keep advantages going. He’s sporting a 73-27 assist-to-turnover rate so far this season. Boogie is also shooting 36% from three while launching 60 of them. There aren’t many players in this draft who combine the ball handling, creativity, and self-creation upside as Boogie. This is the best available pick.

– Larry Golden

21. Brooklyn Nets: Labaron Philon, Alabama

Philon is the most “gadget-y” player in the class, and that’s why I love him in a backcourt next to earlier pick Jeremiah Fears. His game isn’t perfect – he needs to clean up his catch-and-shoot technique and have more anticipation for passing reads – but is consistently a plus across skills. He has not gotten a chance to show off his pull-up shooting as more of a connector in the Alabama system, but still can juice their offense which is nearly ten points better with him on. His positioning overall is elite, making him a threatening defender and able to clean up easy transition looks. If he can build on his scoring (he remains highly efficient at 59% true shooting), Philon could provide a backcourt panacea to endless problems.

– Matt Powers

22. Orlando Magic: Kam Jones, Marquette

Orlando is ready to contend. Their biggest need is a pull-up three-point sniper who can score and run some offense to pull defenders away from Franz and Paolo. In walks Kam Jones, arguably the best college player in the country. Averaging 20 PPG with a 4.2 A/TO his senior season while hitting 38% on six 3PA over a four-year college career sample size, Kam may provide the instant floor-spacing spark Orlando’s offense so desperately needs.

– Ryan Kaminski

23. Orlando Magic: Donnie Freeman

Donnie Freeman is a strong big wing who brings two-way impact because he can score, rebound, defend, and hit the open three. Freeman shows promising touch indicators like high FT% for positive shooting development. The highest ceiling guards on the board were Ben Saraf, who makes incredible highlight passes, and Nolan Traore, who attacks gaps with quick burst, flashes connector tendencies, hustles defensively, and has flashed the pull-up shot on rare occasions. But, neither Saraf nor Traore have been a consistent 3-point shooter. For a contending team targeting good basketball players this late in the draft who can quickly contribute and space the floor, the strategy taken was finding high-floor reserves who can fill a 6th-9th man slot in the rotation with the potential to fill in as starters when called upon. While both guards have higher potential ceilings, hoping rookies develop a skill they don’t currently show on a roster where the opportunity to do so is limited is a tough situation for them to succeed.

– Ryan Kaminski

24. Brooklyn Nets: Ben Saraf, Ulm

Ben Saraf burst onto the first-round radar with his MVP performance at the 2024 U18 Euro Championship. His most obvious strength is his size/feel: he’s measured at 6’5 without shoes and a 6’7.5 wingspan, with a certified highlight reel of passing flair and abrupt steals to boot. While the shot hasn’t quite been falling this year, Saraf has a 33% assist rate and 2.7% steal rate while leveraging his size en route to a 5.4% offensive rebound and 1.1% block rate. And he’s doing this as the unquestioned engine of a surprisingly great Ratiopharm Ulm team that’s currently 9-2 in the Eurocup. Saraf has drawn comparisons to former Ulm PG and current Long Island Net Killian Hayes, especially as a fellow lefty, but this is aesthetic bias personified: Saraf is far more turnover avoidant while showing an ability to make open catch-and-shoot threes (46% open 3P% vs 27% open 3P% for pre-draft Killian). There are clear athletic and shooting concerns with Saraf, but productive teenagers leading productive teams are a dime a dozen. Saraf could be THE tank commander for the Nets as they Dive (in the standings) for Darryn or Lose for Booz(er).

– Avinash Chauhan

25. Brooklyn Nets: Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

Willams was an easy pick for me here, even despite being older at 22 on draft day. He is extremely productive, #6 in Box Plus-Minus in the NCAA. He can shoot – a career 40% three-point shooter on 6 attempts per 100 possessions and 86% from the line on 167 attempts. But more importantly, he has shown his passing has more upside than initially displayed his prior two seasons, now up to 5.2 assists per game compared to only 2.0 turnovers. Despite not being the fleetest of feet, he contributes everywhere, getting some boards, some steals, some blocks with his high feel for the game. The Brooklyn Nets cannot pass up someone who can grease the offense from the wing (Darrion is 6’6”, I should mention) while proving through his production he can hang in athletically.

– Matt Powers

26. Dallas Mavericks: Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

The Mavs need blue-chip young talent. The Luka-to-Lively connection should be a permanent fixture of Mavs basketball for the next decade, but beyond that tandem, there is a real lack of youthful upside on the roster. Nolan Traore has had a rough start to his season in a surprisingly large role for a teenager with Saint Quentin, but the talent is untenable. He is a walking paint touch with NBA-level athleticism at the guard spot. His ability to defend the point of attack and create out of the pick-and-roll pairs well with Luka both on the court and while he sits. The shot will need to come around, but at this point in the draft that is a bet worth taking.

– Tyler Wilson

27. Memphis Grizzlies: Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

Orlando desperately needs more guard creation to relieve pressure from its offensive stars. Pettiford brings that needed offensive juice. He shoots efficiently from deep range off of the bounce, breaks defenses with his speed, and finds his teammates for open shots. Point guards of his size always face a challenging climb to the NBA, but Pettiford’s advanced offensive toolkit and defensive playmaking on Orlando’s roster of giants bode well for his chances.

– Ben Pfeifer

28. Los Angeles Clippers: Nique Clifford, Colorado State

Nique Clifford feels destined to be a Clipper. He’s an older prospect who should be ready to compete on both ends of the floor from the start of training camp. He has had a larger offensive role this season, but that is not his sell as a prospect. Clifford is a grinder on both ends of the floor, an above-the-rim athlete who knows where to be and when to be there. Statistically, his projection as a shooter is a bit murky (68% from the line and  35% from three for his career), but his comfortability in the midrange and shooting over contests is encouraging. For a hard-nosed, defensive-minded team led by two high-usage stars, Clifford is an easy plug-and-play fit.

– Tyler Wilson

29. Boston Celtics: Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

Gonzalez would add another defensively slanted wing into the rotation, something they’ll never complain about. He’s defended at a positive level for stretches throughout his Euroleague play this season, imposing his will as a point of attack and low-man defender. Boston will have no problems waiting for Gonzalez to tap into a passable level of offensive impact, and Gonzalez fell too far for his talent level.

– Ben Pfeifer

30. Utah Jazz: Rasheer Fleming, Saint Joseph’s

Fleming is a 6’9 forward who is showing signs of being able to stretch the floor from three making 39% on 53 attempts in 12 games. Not only is he able to shoot it, but he also has enough handle to attack closeouts and go finish at the rim with force and even finesse with his athleticism. Fleming is still only 20 years old and provides a lot of intrigue with his versatility on both sides of the ball. He currently leads his team in stocks with 41 total (22 steals, 19 blocks). Picking Fleming at the 30th pick is a win.

– Larry Golden

31. Boston Celtics: Rocco Zikarsky, Brisbane

32. Charlotte Hornets: Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

33. Minnesota Timberwolves: Miles Byrd, San Diego State

34. Detroit Pistons: Will Riley, Illinois

35. Charlotte Hornets: Jacob Cofie, Virginia

36. Toronto Raptors: Chaz Lanier, Tennessee

37. Dallas Mavericks: Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

38. Brooklyn Nets: Danny Wolf, Michigan

39. Washington Wizards: Alex Karaban, UConn

40. Indiana Pacers: Flory Bidunga, Kansas

41. San Antonio Spurs: Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

42. Chicago Bulls: Tomislav Ivisic, Illinois

43. San Antonio Spurs: Walter Clayton Jr., Florida

44. Oklahoma City Thunder: Xaivian Lee, Princeton

45. Los Angeles Lakers: Igor Milicic Jr., Tennessee

46. Golden State Warriors: Juni Mobley, Ohio State

47. Los Angeles Lakers: Adou Thiero, Arkansas

48. Cleveland Cavaliers: Bogoljub Markovic, KK Mega

49. Atlanta Hawks: Jamir Watkins, Florida State

50. Washington Wizards: Bennett Stirtz, Drake

51. Washington Wizards: Dink Pate, Mexico City

52. Charlotte Hornets: JoJo Tugler, Houston

53. Orlando Magic: Jalil Bethea, Miami

54. Dallas Mavericks: KJ Lewis, Arizona

55. Memphis Grizzlies: Tucker Devries, West Virginia

56. New York Knicks: Drake Powell, UNC

57. Houston Rockets: Max Shulga, VCU

58. Orlando Magic: Otega Oweh, Kentucky

59. Cleveland Cavaliers: Milan Momcilovic, Iowa State

The post 2025 NBA Mock Draft 1.0 appeared first on Swish Theory.

Milan Momcilovic’s absence from all mainstream mock drafts and boards perplexes me. After a freshman year where the 6’8 forward proved himself an elite shotmaker, he’s positioned well to make a run at the 2025 draft for an elite Iowa State team.

The shotmaking numbers are gaudy — 36.1% from three on 8.8 attempts per 100, a 49.9 three-point attempt rate, 80.9% on free-throws and 45.6% (68-149) on long two-pointers. The only other 6’8+ freshman to match Momcilovic’s shooting production was Lauri Markkanen.

The eye test reflects these numbers, as Momcilovic sprints off of movement from NBA range, pulls up off of the dribble and feathers in Dirk-inspired fadeaways in the intermediate. Very few shooters his height and age compare to Momcilovic. That alone is worth something in an NBA where teams regard shooting so highly.

Momcilovic’s athletic translation will be the primary question for his NBA outlook. He’s fairly slow on both ends without much explosion or bend, evidenced by his poor athletic indicators (1.0% steal rate, 20.1 free-throw rate, zero dunks). We rarely see players with physical indicators this poor make the NBA.

Despite those major problems, Momcilovic defends at a positive level in college. His footspeed might limit his effectiveness on the perimeter at the next level, but he’s a stellar team defender who always positions himself to close gaps and help at the basket. That same feel manifests on offense, as Momcilovic is an effective secondary playmaker off of his shooting gravity.

We shouldn’t let imperfect statistical history blind us to outlier talent, and that’s what Milan Monmcilovic’s shotmaking is. I’ve never scouted a freshman prospect with these kind of extreme, outlier strengths and weaknesses. I’m willing to bet on Momcilovic’s unique traits and hope for physical development as his body matures, but he’ll be a fascinating case to track throughout the season.

Matt Powers – Xaivian Lee, Princeton

Xaivian Lee needs to improve to become an NBA player, and perhaps significantly so. This is not ideal for a rising junior in a minor conference, but I believe there are reasons for trusting Lee to do just that.

First, Lee is young for his grade, as only 20 years old. This is important as he is still on the steep side of the aging curve, if not as steep as ages 18 to 19 or 19 to 20. This is also important because Lee’s biggest flaw, without a doubt, is being only 165 pounds at most recent measurement.

Adding that weight will elevate the stellar craft and technique we’ve already seen Lee display on a regular basis. It’s good he’s in the Ivy league where he has room to fully experiment despite the lack of weight, as he’s able to create large margins in which to operate with his elite shiftiness.

Lee had more drives than any of the 2023 drafted NCAA guards. While this is surely aided tremendously by the poor competition, I can defend the stat still in a few ways. 1.) The degree of outperformance, 67% higher than his peers’ averages, 2.) His performance kept up against higher comp. In fact, he even played better inside the arc (50% -> 55% from two) and nearly led the conference in RAPM versus top 100 competition. 3.) He tested very well at the G League Elite Camp, taller than expected (6’2.75” without shoes, acceptable for a point guard), among the best at agility testing and showing off a surprising 36.5” max vertical.

Now, let’s get to the actual basketball. Lee is a dribble-pass-shoot guard who also blocked more shots (14, a lot for 6’2.75”) than all of Isaiah Collier, Jared McCain, Rob Dillingham and KJ Simpson combined. He plays more physically than your everyday slight guard, also excelling on the defensive glass where he was second on the team in rebounds. He seems closer to a very good shooter than an elite one, with 34% from three, 80% from the line, 34% from midrange and 62% at the rim splits. But every one of those is improved from the year before, and, again, there is reason to believe he will grow beyond. The rim finishing in particular is very promising, in the 82nd percentile for layup efficiency on 11 layup attempts per 100 possessions.

Additionally, Lee’s technique is very strong. He is a weapon both on and off ball due to masterclasses (for age) of timing, footwork, deception, hand movements. His top play types showcase that, being above average efficiency in the following actions: spot up (119 possessions), PNR handler (88), handoffs (66), isolation (62), transition (55), cut (30). That’s a healthy diet you can plug and play into any offensive style. This play style flexibility is only enhanced by his sense of experimentation.

Technique, combined with age, is latent value. It is the key building block to development that Lee can rely upon time and again. Don’t be surprised if he looks like a first-round pick come December.

Beyond the RK – Jeremy Roach, Baylor

Transferring from Duke with an extra year of eligibility granted by the NCAA to players who competed during the COVID-19 pandemic season, new Baylor guard Jeremy Roach knows how to handle the pressure when the lights shine brightest. With the Blue Devils, Roach started 83% of his 130 games over four seasons, advancing to a Final Four, an Elite Eight, and the 2nd round in 3 March Madness appearances, bringing the ying in experience to the Baylor backcourt to the yang of the sensational freshman walking onto campus for the first time in VJ Edgecome. With VJ expected to fly around the court as a north-south downhill force of nature out of the gates, what can Baylor fans expect from the other newcomer guard joining the squad this season?

Jeremy Roach, 6’1”, fits the strong mold of Baylor Guard Past with good two-way instincts to make winning plays on defense while staying on attack mode on offense with an efficient all-around game and good feel for running pick-and-roll and ISO sets to create open looks for himself and teammates. Jeremy uses tight ball control handles and sound quick burst body control to beat his initial defender, rise and fire for a jumper, or drive into the paint for a finish at the rim or kickout to the 3pt line. Jeremy’s lethal floater comes in handy as a deadly weapon to keep drop defenses honest when driving at the rim, using mean stop-start hesitation dribble moves, sound hop step footwork, and clean bump-and-finishing packages in the paint to draw AND1 fouls. When Roach catches a rhythm pulling up for tough elbow jumpers and 3pt shots off the dribble, he becomes hard to contain for any defense he faces.

Roach shows effort on the defensive end taking charges, reading passing lanes to jump gaps and use quick hands for deflections, and not giving up on plays by contesting shots from behind even after being beat on the perimeter. Forcing turnovers and flipping fast breaks on their head creates quick and easy 4pt swings for his team. Jeremy will lift his team for entire stretches as everyone feels his presence in every possession on both sides of the floor. In a close win over Xavier on Nov 25, 2022, Jeremy Roach took over in the clutch for Duke as the game slowed down; quieting the crowd at every turn; dominating as on-ball scoring creator; initiating P&R variations with two screeners in Horns and Double-Drag; scoring at all three levels from all over the floor; drilling tough shot after tough shot; showing supreme decision-making feel.

Roach has improved his efficiency across the board in his time in college, nearly cutting his turnover percentage in half over a four year span, with impressive development since his sophomore season, rising from a 32% 3pt shooter in Year 2 to a 43% 3pt shooter on the same number of attempts in Year 4. His overall impact has risen from 0-1 BPM in his first two years to 3.1 BPM as a junior and 7.2 BPM as a senior, with a huge jump on the offensive side to 4.5 OBPM, most likely due to increasing overall efficiency, reducing turnovers, and getting to the line more often.

In his 2023-24 season at Duke, Roach took 32% of his shots at the rim, converting 58% of his 113 FGA in that range. Able to get his shot off from anywhere on the floor, Jeremy spreads his shot attempts out evenly with 33% being 2pt jumpers (116 FGA) and 36% coming from beyond the arc. (126 3PA) Shooting 84% FT% at the line, 43% 3P% from deep, and 59% TS% as a scorer, Roach brings efficient scoring versatility.

Between his smooth floater, efficient shooting at the line and from beyond the arc, defensive instincts, offensive feel, and overall efficient scoring versatility, Jeremy Roach shows many promising touch indicators for future scoring and shooting development while flashing potential two-way impact that could translate to his upcoming final season in college and help him pave a path to the next level, the NBA.

Roshan Potluri – Collin Murray-Boyles, South Carolina

I can understand, you’re probably wondering, “I’ve seen him on a couple of mainstream boards where he’s in the late lottery range. Why is Collin Murray-Boyles in a roundtable on the most underrated returners for the 2025 draft class?” Even with the pre-season hype around the sophomore, I believe he is underrated because he should firmly be in the discussion in the top 5 of the 2025 NBA Draft. Let’s take a look at why:

Murray-Boyles had an extremely productive season in his first year with the South Carolina Gamecocks, especially for someone who will be 20.03 on draft day: mere months older than incoming freshmen V.J. Edgecombe and Kon Knueppel. Statistically, the production was eye-popping. He was only involved in 45.7% of his team’s possessions when he was on the floor, yet he posted a BPM of +9.5 and a RAPM of +6.1 which are high for a freshman. Standing at 6’7″, he is undersized as a center. Despite this, he produced a 61.6 TS%, 12.0 OREB%, 17.5 DREB%, 17.1 AST%, and over 20 dunks for the season. Murray-Boyles may be undersized, but he functionally produced on the court to a degree that compares to other high-profile 7-foot freshmen like Joel Embiid, Deandre Ayton, Evan Mobley, and Karl Anthony Towns.

Another example of his statistical excellence: the only freshmen since 2008 to ever record above a 5 BPM, 60 TS%, 15 DREB%, 10 AST%, 2 STL%, and 20 dunks are Joel Embiid, Zion Williamson, and Collin Murray-Boyles.

While the production speaks for itself, what does Collin Murray-Boyles truly excel at and why is that worth a potential top 5 selection? The answer lies in his dominant processing on both sides of the ball.

With his feel, high-level strength, balance, and hand-eye coordination, Murray-Boyles brings tenacious defense at the rim and guarding out in space. He’s able to take away a ballhandler’s breathing space with his combination of stifling length, strength, and ground coverage. Murray-Boyles excels as a rim protector, leveraging his massive standing reach and outstanding hand-eye coordination to effortlessly erase shots at the rim. Whether it’s as the primary anchor or rotating over from the weak side, his presence as the rim is undeniable.

The quick decision-making is apparent on the offensive side of the ball as well. He’s able to spray passes to find advantage situations whether it is out of post-ups or DHOs. Oftentimes, he’s able to open up new scoring opportunities just due to the incredible speed and placement that he delivers these passes with. Murray-Boyles does have his flaws with his shot and his size as a big but he has the pathways to become more of a ballhandler and scale as a forward offensively. His potential as a ballhandler is evident in the high school film, although he’s more reliant on getting to his left as a driver. He struggles with ball control and pick-up points when using his right, but his exceptional strength allows him to carve space on drives, compensating when his handle falls short.

The major question with Murray-Boyles’ NBA projection is his shot. I understand the hesitancy, as he’s only shot five 3’s and 67.4% from the charity stripe in his freshman year. While these numbers are poor, from a projection standpoint Murray-Boyles has improved on his touch numbers year over year and has had more shooting volume in his high school career. For context, he shot 51% from the line at Adidas 3SSB in 2022, 63.2% at Wasatch Academy his senior year, and now in college, that number has risen to 67.4%. He shows great touch on non-rim 2 attempts as well, shooting 41.3% with the Gamecocks. The high school and AAU sample only supplements this idea, shooting 53.5% on 28 runners and hooks the year before college. On tape, there’s good energy transfer and fluidity in the mechanics of his face-up jumpers which is a wide majority of his shooting sample in high school. For a player that’s considered a non-shooting big, Murray-Boyles has taken a moderate number of midrange jumpers between his senior year of high school and final year of AAU shooting 50% inside the arc on 22 attempts.

The complete lack of these jumpers within and beyond the arc at South Carolina can be attributed to his role as a screen and roll big. Murray-Boyles needs to work on improving his volume and touch further, but the growth over the past couple of years in tandem with his impressive hand-eye coordination gives me confidence that he can get to a respectable level by the end of his rookie scale deal in the NBA. 

Overall, Murray-Boyles can be an upper-echelon defender in the NBA with his physical traits and feel, showing signs even as an 18-year-old where he would orchestrate South Carolina’s entire defense from the backline. With his sophomore year at South Carolina, his draft stock will be determined by how his budding offensive skills improve, but with what he’s done so far and his feel for the game, I have no reason to believe he can’t reach those heights in the 2025 NBA Draft.

Larry Golden – Kam Jones, Marquette

In the NBA, the game forever evolves due to teams changing playstyles and other teams trying to copy what the successful teams are doing. In order for teams to meet their most potential they must find players to perform well in different roles pertaining to their team. The key is finding players in the draft that can come in and fit right into certain roles and maybe their skill level allows for a multitude of roles. Kam jones is a player in this upcoming draft that I believe can come into the NBA and make things happen because of his utility both on the ball and off.

Last season Kam Jones shot 39.9% from beyond the arc on 239 attempts and 109 of those were off the catch making those at 39.4% clip. His shooting is what will make his life easier in the league while drawing closeouts and getting two-feet in the painted area. When watching Jones play he has a good feel for making the next right connective passing read. When the defense failed to make a rotation or if the rotator was a bit late, Jones made them pay finishing at the rim at a 67% clip. I was a little underwhelmed with his percentage from the mid range area(, but in the nba threes and layups are the goal and he made both of those at a great rate.

Secondary ballhander is the role I really see for Jones at the NBA level who can take on some pick and roll reps on the second side of the floor. Jones was used in pick and roll 43% of his usage and ranked in the 85th percentile. His combination of handle and size for the position allows for him to see the floor a bit better and the handle is tight enough to squeeze through congested spots on the floor.

AJ Carter – Clifford Omoruyi, Alabama

Clifford Omoruyi has been well established as one of the top defensive players in college basketball, anchoring a Rutgers defense that has been top 25 in the country each of the past two years before transferring to Alabama this offseason for his 5th year of college. He’s a classic backline rim protector with good length (6’9 barefoot, 7’6 wingspan), athleticism, and a lean but well built frame that can hold up against physicality. 

Omoruyi uses these physical tools to dominate around the rim defensively, finishing 3rd in the country in block percentage at 12.7% last season (via KenPom). He can occasionally get himself in foul trouble but is for the most part fundamentally sound defensively, prioritizing being in the right position over chasing blocks. Omoruyi is also a very capable P&R defender, having both backline rim protection ability with enough agility to cover ground when asked to play more aggressively. He isn’t what you would classify as a “switch big” but generally holds up well enough when defending in space to not get exploited and has shown flashes defending on an island against smaller guards. Omoruyi is also capable of finishing off possessions as a defensive rebounder, posting a strong DRB% of 23.7% for his college career. 

As good as he is defensively, Cliff’s lack of versatility on the offensive end is what has prevented him from getting serious hype as a draft prospect thus far. He can score around the rim at an adequate level, but doesn’t offer much outside of that. He isn’t a threat to score outside the paint and lacks touch on floaters or push shots. Omoruyi also has a paltry 0.4 AST/TO ratio for his career, and hasn’t really shown any progress in that department across his 4 years in college. It’s worth noting that Rutgers has been mostly abysmal offensively for Omoruyi’s career there, and play finishing centers like him are particularly context dependent, often needing to play off of strong creators to be effective – something Rutgers has sorely lacked. 

There’s a little room for hope that Cliff can show more progress playing in what should easily be the best offensive context of his career at Alabama this season, but for the most part we already know what he is – and there’s nothing wrong with that. The offensive limitations put a cap on the ceiling of what type of NBA prospect he can be, but he’s such a good defensive anchor that the bar he has to reach on the other end is pretty low. With just a little bit of improvement to his skillset you can see the pathway to him being a useful NBA backup center, making Cliff Omoruyi someone worth monitoring as a prospect this season. 

Tyler Wilson – KJ Lewis, Arizona

KJ Lewis is a slashing guard built for playoff basketball. In an NBA that seems to grow taller and shoot better with every summer, the words “slashing guard” and “playoff basketball” don’t feel like they belong in the same sentence. Slashing guard? You couldn’t find a wing who can shoot? Range, in both wingspan and scoring threat, has become the conventional draft ethos of the modern day. With that said, might I interest you in a Strong Safety instead?

The sell with KJ begins at his defensive impact. He is listed at 6’4 210 and plays like a moving fire hydrant. There is a Naismithian quality to his game that is undeniable, an intersection of strength and agility that resembles an NFL defensive back more than a two guard. He is able to stand up forwards in the post while smothering smaller guards on the perimeter. The ability to remain strong while sliding around the court is a skill in itself. His feel as a help defender and comfortability in switches was great. Outside of occasional bouts with over-physicality, it was hard to come away with anything substantively negative to say on the defensive side of the ball. KJ was an incredibly effective defensive player as a freshman, in a high major conference, at 19 years old.

In recent years, the going has gotten tough in the National Basketball Association for defense-first guards. The threshold of NBA quality offense has grown so incredibly high that it has become nearly impossible to survive if you are not a credible threat to score the basketball. Lewis’ freshman year usage rate of 16.4 is incredibly low for a potential NBA prospect, particularly a guard. The fact he was a relative non-threat from beyond the arc (34% on 3.4 attempts per 100) does not help matters. The path towards NBA minutes as a low usage non-shooting shooting guard is incredibly thin.

While Lewis did not threaten defenses as a shooter last year at Arizona, there is genuine reason for optimism. He shot 79% from the line in college and despite uninspiring numbers around the rim and in the midrange, his tape going back to Duncanville and the 3SSB circuit shows real touch around the rim with flashes of a functional jumper off the dribble. Shot development is an imperfect and unpredictable science, but the foundation is there for steady growth over time.

As a slasher, Lewis’ athleticism shines yet again with the ability to blow by defenders, take bumps and finish through contact. With an unrefined handle, he was best attacking in a straight line or out of an advantage as a freshman, but his coordination and athleticism allow for a long developmental runway as a creator. KJ was a wrecking ball downhill in high school, and on an Arizona roster that lost nearly all of their starters (sans the immortal Caleb Love) there should be more room for him to explore the studio space as a driver. 

What makes KJ Lewis such an intriguing prospect is his combination of athleticism and feel. That, my friends, buried at the very end of my monologue, is the key to Lewis’ pitch as a prospect. He anticipates actions on defense, acts with decisiveness, takes care of the ball, and reads the floor well as a passer, all while being the best athlete on the court. He is versatile not only in his physical capabilities, but his ability to make quick decisions while playing a physically versatile role. As a freshman, we saw that manifest primarily on the defensive end of the floor, but it is exactly what makes the gamble on his offensive upside so appealing. 

Ahmed Jama – Nique Clifford, Colorado State

Despite a late cycle surge onto draft boards this past cycle, 6’6 Colorado State wing Nique Clifford surprised many by returning to school for his 5th and final season of college basketball. Riding the wave of an impressive tournament showing, Clifford was given as good a chance as any veteran college player to work his way into serious draft consideration in a draft class mired in uncertainty. In an attempt to reverse engineer Clifford’s decision to return in lieu of remaining in the draft, I referenced Barttorvik.com to find statistical comparisons to Clifford’s previous season. In Bart Torvik’s 17 season database, Clifford is one of three players to fulfill the statistical query of Defensive Rebounding% ≥ 20; Assist/Turnover Ratio ≥ 1.5; Block % ≥ 2; Steal % ≥ 2; 3PA/100 Possessions ≥ 5; Dunks made ≥ 20. The other two players being TCU’s (now Oklahoma City Thunder) Kenrich Williams and former New Mexico State Aggie Johnny McCants. Unsurprisingly all three players performed nebulous roles, as undersized bigs. The statistical company Clifford keeps is pertinent to his decision to return, because in my opinion, Clifford and his camp recognized unorthodoxy, in NBA decision maker’s eyes, is synonymous with risk. Whether or not this calculation was correct, returning to college has positioned Clifford as one of the best prospects in the country this season. 

Clifford’s unique brand of production is, in my opinion, a byproduct of his high school career, where he played as an undersized big. Despite Clifford measuring at only an 8’6 standing reach at the NBA Combine, the same as 2024 draft entrees Stephon Castle and AJ Johnson, Clifford ranked 45th in the country in defensive rebounding rate. This relentlessness on the glass was made possible by Clifford’s dynamic leaping ability, and more specifically his minimal load time on jumps. Clifford’s exceptional leaping ability, paired with his timing crashing the glass, allows him to contribute as a rebounder in a way virtually no other players his size are. While Clifford’s offensive rebounding rate of 4.5% is comparatively underwhelming, I believe this is a byproduct of Colorado State’s emphasis on limiting opponent transition opportunities at the cost of offensive rebounds. While they ranked 120th in defensive rebounding rate in the country, Colorado State was 302nd in offensive rebounding rate. Clifford’s internal clock as a rebounder manifests as a defender as well, where he’s able to fill a variety of roles, from hounding smaller players at the point-of-attack, chasing shooters off off-ball screens, and making long rotations as a backline defender and providing supplementary rim protection. 

As much confidence as Clifford’s unique basketball background and athletic traits give me, ultimately for a player his size to succeed in the NBA his shot will need to develop into a reliable skill. Clifford logged a pedestrian (relative to his position) 6 3PA/100 possessions this past season. However, his underlying shooting numbers provide reason for optimism. On 82 catch-and-shoot 3 attempts Clifford shot 41.5%, and his solid 38% on pull-up two’s only further substantiates Clifford’s potential as a reliable floor-spacer. Additionally, Colorado State’s playstyle elucidates Clifford’s underwhelming 3-point volume. As effective as Colorado State’s offense was with its given talent (61st in the country in adjusted offensive efficiency, per Bart torvik), its identity was almost entirely defined by motion heavy Princeton concepts, and this scheme in my opinion came at the cost of spot-up 3 attempts. Playing in almost exclusively 5-out alignments, a vacated paint enabled CSU to finish as perhaps the best cutting team in the country (95th percentile in cutting volume and 99th percentile in cutting efficiency per Synergy). Comparatively Colorado State finished in the 69th percentile in catch-and-shoot frequency. What makes Princeton offenses so reliable is how their concepts allow teams to generate efficient offense often in lieu of traditional ‘advantage creator’, however this emphasis on movement and a ‘creation by committee’ approach can come at the cost of clean catch-and-shoot attempts. And when Clifford’s role specifically is taken into consideration, he often is CSU’s most consistent line-breaking threat as a cutter and ballhandler. 

All in all, Clifford’s previous production, when contextualized with his basketball past and current college role, paint the picture of a player capable of rapidly calibrating his game to fit an NBA role. With Colorado State graduating their top scorer and highest usage player from this past season, Isaiah Stevens, Nique Clifford is poised to cement himself as a need-to-know prospect in the 2025 draft class. 

Stewart Zahn – Grant Nelson, Alabama

Arriving in Alabama via transfer last season, Grant Nelson carried a fair amount of hype with him from NDSU, where he was not only highly productive but also showcased alluring skill and athleticism. With a talented cast of teammates in Tuscaloosa, Nelson took on an entirely different role with the Tide, a role that only further highlighted his versatility. 

No longer a Bison and one of the immediate primary offensive options, Nelson adapted very well to a more supplementary role with Alabama (to be fair, a very well-spaced context). The profile of Nelson’s individual scoring opportunities drastically changed, with his post-up and isolation frequencies slashed (21.1% of opportunities to 5.3%, and 15.6% to almost nothing – 2.2% respectively). To his credit, Grant took it in stride and committed to his role, shifting his focus onto the more off-ball aspects of his position, such as spot-ups, screening/rolling, cuts and transition. In a fast-paced environment like Alabama, Nelson nearly doubled his transition frequency, and Coach Nate Oats even allowed him to run some PnR’s and DHO’s throughout the season. The ball-handling and passing both seem to clear his positional thresholds. Playing large amounts of minutes at center, while not his traditional position, Nelson displayed great technique as a roller. His rolls were fluid, his slips were quick and timely, and his PnP game was a crucial element to Alabama’s patented play-style and spacing. All of this is to say that Nelson’s game appears to have great malleability to provide whatever a team may need from their forward. 

Nelson’s efficiency in most play-types is quite good, with one exception: the 3-point shot. Even as a career 75% free throw shooter (81% last season) with a decent stroke, Nelson has yet to solidify himself as threatening perimeter shooter. Capable, with just enough volume to be respected, Nelson still has plenty of work to do to iron out his shot and turn it into a real weapon. Attacking closeouts is definitely in his wheelhouse as a ball-handler, and a proficient or even average shot from the outside would really open up the court to his driving ability. He even dabbled in some pull-up shooting out of PnR’s, and while the results weren’t great, he would make the correct read to shoot it, and that was encouraging to see.

Defensively, Nelson again was playing out of position for much of the year. It was necessary for Alabama to have their most potent offensive lineup, and Grant held his own on the other end. Undersized as an NBA center (and not what he will be asked to do at the next level), Nelson did exhibit pretty good understanding of positioning himself in relation to the roller. When covering PnP’s, Nelson’s mobility allowed him to get out to the perimeter for worthwhile contests. As the primary rim protector a lot of the time, the awareness, anticipation and reactivity Nelson demonstrated was pretty compelling, and he would use his length and timing to finish the job with a block. That should translate well to his more suitable position as a forward and thus a weakside rim protector, potentially contributing with some additional opposition at the rim. Also a serviceable perimeter defender for his position, Nelson checks a lot of boxes defensively. On top of all that, Grant was hard-nosed as a rebounder all year, and he earned himself Coach Oat’s Hard-Hat award ten times, tied for the most on the team. 

While his stats reflect a quieter year than at NDSU, Nelson proved himself a multi-faceted player at Alabama, with room to improve particularly as a shooter, which would have an amplified effect on the rest of his game. He will be striving to validate last season, and he will have the chance to encompass and maybe even shed the “underrated”  tag throughout the Draft cycle.

Avinash Chauhan – Motiejus Krivas, Arizona

Motiejus Krivas is a big dude with some serious skill. It doesn’t take much imagination to picture him dominating college basketball in the near future.

Let’s start with the bad: Krivas could very well be at the horrific intersection of non-shooting poor finisher and limited defensive upside. He shot a middling 58% at the rim last year, and more worryingly, lineups with Krivas at the 5 consistently scored worse at the rim than with the starter, Oumar Ballo. Arizona shot 4% worse at the rim with Krivas on the floor, and of Arizona’s 5 most common lineups, the two with Krivas fared by far the worst at the rim. Part of this swing is that he was backing up a pretty monstrous rim finisher in Ballo, but it’s pretty inexcusable that Arizona shot just 54% at the rim with Krivas on the floor. He may also appear to be low feel, averaging a whopping 6.1 fouls per 40 with a measly 4% assist rate, he took zero threes on the season, and perhaps worst of all, he garnered just a 3.4% block rate in 20 conference games. If you’re a non-spacer who does not contribute to positive rim scoring, you foul incessantly, and you’re unable to effectively pass or shoot OR protect the rim, what exactly are you doing on the floor?

But while we have 439 minutes of Krivas’s NCAA sample, we also have a 637 minute sample at FIBA U19/U18 Euros/U20 Euros, and 1000 minutes playing for Lithuania’s Zalgiris. Krivas wasn’t terrible in NCAA by any stretch, with a respectable 3.4 BPM in 36 games and an overall 4.5 lineup net rating across all competition. But Krivas was genuinely ridiculous in a number of important international events, and it would be foolish to throw away all the data we have for a low minutes NCAA single season sample.

Let’s talk about the shooting. It sounds pretty insane to say this about a guy who attempted ZERO threes in the NCAA season, but Krivas seems like a decent bet to get some threes up this year. First off, Krivas actually has a decent track record of 3P shooting volume in the past: he’s averaging about 1 3PA/40 across 28 FIBA games, and he put up 61 threes across his final two seasons in Lithuania. Now for the fun stuff: Krivas is a ridiculously good free throw shooter with notable volume (especially considering he is a FT drawing machine). He shot 73% FT in his final season in Lithuania (139/191), 70% at FIBA (78/112), and he’s coming off a 78% FT season at Arizona (49/63). What’s more impressive is that Krivas has progressively become a bit of a touch god around the rim, with a strong diet of runners and hooks sprinkled throughout heavy post up usage. Across his FIBA U20 tourney this summer + Arizona, a whopping 17% of his total shots have come on hooks, making them on a staggering 58% (18/31). Bart has him at 13/29 on long 2s at Arizona.

To reiterate, we’re talking about a 7’2 mf who was putting up 3s in Europe as a teenager, is pushing the high 70s FT on extremely great volume, and has the proclivity to take and make hooks at a high rate. And he’s still technically a teenager. Again, it’s never a great idea to bet on a guy who literally took no 3s in an NCAA season. But shooting dev seems uniquely feasible for this particular case.

Personally, I don’t care too much if he shoots or not, since he’s also an absolutely insane rebounder. Krivas is coming off a 14.7% OREB/22.8% DREB season in NCAA: there have been only 9 drafted players since 2008 to match those numbers across their career. It gets crazier: Krivas averages the most rebounds per 40 in the TWENTY EIGHT YEAR HISTORY of the U18 Euros (10+ mpg). His 21.8 rebounds per 40 is well ahead of 2nd place Enes Freedom (20.2), with Usman Garuba (18.6) and Marc Gasol (17.7) not too far behind. Again, pretty much every good Euro prospect has played in the U18 Euros, including so many notable bigs since 1996. It is an absolutely huge deal that he is the most productive rebounder on a minute basis in the entirety of available data for this tournament. 

He has similarly crushed the U20 Euros and Lithuania Pro League: he put up an unreal 19% OREB and 28% DREB across 48 games of LKL+NKL. He isn’t a Zach Edey/DeJuan Blair level rebounding prospect given the lower comp level, but Krivas really isn’t THAT far off. Throw on his massive 7’5 wingspan, and Krivas is pretty easily the best rebounding prospect in the class if he declares, and should be one of the best rebounders in the league from day 1.

Rebounding is often a measure of physicality, but in Krivas’ case, I think it’s a unique look at his unreal anticipation and impressive feel for the game. Again, his 4.2% assist/1.4% steal/6.1 FC may seem horrifying, but make no mistake: Krivas has a legitimately great feel for the game. This is a guy who has shown a history of racking up steals at a pretty great rate for his size: across ~ 100 Lithuanian league games, he was above 2% steal. He averaged ~ 1.5 steals/40 across all FIBA tourneys. Much of this is just being at the right place at the time: he’s able to anticipate reads through gaps and use his length to make easy pickoffs. But he’s also a legit great passer. He can make pretty solid reads out of the post, though he can be overambitious and thereby turnover prone (>17% TO in 100 NKL/LKL games).

But his passing feel is especially demonstrated through his FIBA numbers. Despite a middling 0.7 A:TO in FIBA and 4% assist rate in NCAA, Krivas has put up 12.5% assist, 20.4% assist, and 14.2% assist in his last 3 FIBA stretches. And before you question the value of FIBA Euros in ascertaining playmaking upside, consider an all time passing development case in Domantas Sabonis, who was a complete non passer in all NCAA and European pro league games but had a 7 game stretch where he was a productive primary initiator for Lithuania’s FIBA U18 team. With a consistent steal and assist track record, coupled with his sheer size and length, Krivas has a pretty cool combination of tools and feel that could lead to seemingly unexpected offensive development.

The list of strengths is getting a bit ridiculous. This is a dude who can rebound at an Edey-lite level, potentially shoot, generate steals and assists, and has one of the strongest FIBA production profiles ever. After all, he was 35 PER at U18 Euros, 35 PER at U20 Euros (led tourney), and 37.6 PER at U20 Euros (led tourney). 

It’s probably important to reiterate that Mr. Krivas is a 7’2 individual with a giant 7’5 WS. I once wrote about the history of underclassmen who measured at the NBA combine with a WS over 7’4 WS. It is an insane list with an insane hit rate. Oh, and he might sound like an uber slow Euro big with painful verticality and terrible lateral movement. Well the verticality is probably true, but Krivas legitimately moves very well. In fact, he measured at 3.55 s for the sprint and 11.88 for the agility drill, which was significantly better than his peer Aday Mara (4.04 and 12.81, respectively) and somewhat comparable to Pacome Dadiet (3.47 and 12.29) and Salaun (3.63 and 11.84). This is obviously a tongue in cheek comparison, since Dadiet and Salaun are definitely faster and prolly just didn’t know how to game the system effectively (hence their massive leaps at the combine), but their relative closeness to Krivas still underscores how well he can move. With his incredible wingspan, solid movement for size, and strong feel (adept steal and pass generator), Krivas theoretically shouldn’t be much of a defensive liability. In fact, most of his positive net rating was via defense: Arizona’s defense was 6.4 points better/100 possessions with Krivas on the court, and 7.7 p/100 against t100 comp. Much of this was through his rebounding goodness: opposing teams rebounded 3.3% worse and shot 3% worse at the rim with Krivas on the court. 

Herein lies the issue: Krivas had an undeniably positive effect on defense this past year, but most of that came from mitigating second chance points and less from actually blocking shots. Despite his 7’5 WS, he measured with a paltry 22 inch standing vert that would be amongst the lowest in the NBA. He clocked a pedestrian 12.9% HC dunk rate, and had just a 4% block rate this year. He’s definitely a physical player capable of backing down guys in the post en route to a heavy postup diet, and he’s put up ~ 50 FTr in nearly every context; but the lack of verticality is somewhat of a stifler. I think it’s fair to project a bit of improvement: he was hovering above 6% block in Lithuania, and he’s averaged a whopping 4 blocks per 40 (~10% block) across 14 FIBA games in the last two years. I am well aware that the NCAA and NBA are far different than FIBA tourneys (where bigs are much more prone to dominate given the differential rules) and Lithuania (LKL and NKL have “grown men” but its a pretty weak league generally). It’s not a 1:1 comparison, but is it not fair to project some improvements for one of the most productive youth FIBA careers we’ve ever seen?

Not every latent strength has to actualize for Krivas to return legit NBA value. European bigs tend to be a bit of a mystery box, even when we have significant track records for them in various youth simulacrums. The common thread does seem to be rebounding: from Sabonis, Mirotic, and Gasol to Freedom, Zubac, and Vucevic, there are tons of elite rebounding/productive Euro centers that found a role (because of their feel, productivity, and outlier rebounding). We know Krivas is productive, we know he’s going to bring immediate offensive and defensive value with his rebounding, and we know that he has exceptional length, agility, and feel for position. But what’s stopping him from reaching the path of these European contemporaries?  Is path to being a quasi-Vucevic possible for Krivas, especially since Vuc has a similar WS? Can he be a Nikola Mirotic type? If he stays in school a year or two more, can he emerge as a virtuoso passer on par with Sabonis and Gasol? Or will he never really put it together and have a Garuba type career? 

I think there’s some very conceivable flaws with Krivas, some that he may never be able to overcome. But I think we’re also completely undermining a sneaky upside tail, one that may be particularly manifestable given the departure of starter Oumar Ballo. 7’5 wingspans do not grow on trees, nor do prospects with long ass wingspans have the feel or outlier rebounding or historic production profile of Krivas. One of the greatest producers in FIBA youth history is potentially eligible for the draft, and it’s about time he’s given his due credit.

The post Roundtable: Underrated Returners appeared first on Swish Theory.