Meet the top prospects of the 2024 NBA Draft.
Welcome to the official Swish Theory Big Board for the 2024 NBA draft. We brought together our draft team of eight contributors to make the following consensus ranking of our top 60 best prospects in the class. In addition to the ranks and player pitches, we have provided a ‘disagreement level’ so you can tell which players had the widest range of opinions regarding their game. Enjoy!
High Perspective
Advantage creation, the ability to push defenses into extra rotations and create easier scoring opportunities, is the lifeblood of NBA offenses. This foundation is built upon drawing defensive attention, creating this gravity through play types such as drives or post-ups that collapse defenses. While screens are common, elite NBA players can often create advantages from a standstill, without assistance.
This is often why teams end up drafting players who can consistently create advantages at the top of the NBA Draft every year, and why these players like Joel Embiid, Nikola Jokic, Giannis Antentoukounmpo, Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Luka Doncic, etc are often the best volume creators in the NBA.
The 2024 NBA Draft has been marred by the image of being one of the worst draft classes in recent NBA history due to the lack of advantage creation bets at the top of the draft, however, the 2024 Draft is not as barren as it seems, with a young advantage-creating prospect hidden in plain sight.
Allow me to introduce Ron Holland; he’s a 6’ 8” wing weighing 205 pounds, boasting a remarkable 6’ 10.5” wingspan, and has been showcasing his skills with the G League Ignite this past year. Coming into the cycle as the 2nd-ranked player in the country, it is not confusing to see why scouts were enamored with Holland’s unique intersection of size, explosion, and feel at the age of 18.
Although his season with Ignite has been tumultuous and littered with growing pains, the signs he exhibited as a creator were tantalizing for his upside as a ballhandler. Holland can break down defenses with an explosive first step and then use his exceptional change of direction, deceleration, and size to get deeper in the paint. These tools enable Holland to create advantages from a standstill with the ball in his hands but this is still relatively new for him. Playing mostly as a high-energy big in high school for Duncanville, Holland has only been able to truly experience and experiment with his handle in the halfcourt in recent years with his AAU team, Drive Nation. This opportunity to play on the ball has been tremendous for his growth as a creator and has only extended further into his G League career.
Playing as a big for so long, Ron Holland’s handling and shooting are still very much in their infancy, resulting in his shooting efficiency being low and problem-solving with a handle that causes him to gather early and rely on his athletic traits in the G League. His driving acumen has been strong with Ignite, with 80% of his halfcourt dunks coming off of drives to the rim, a free throw rate of 28, and an at-the-rim rate of 56.2% on 271 attempts. He can get low and explode out of tight corners while keeping his upper body upright on drives which should allow him to perceive more passing angles than the average NBA creator as his handle improves. The balance between scoring and passing out of advantages has been a concern brought up with Holland but I would attribute this more to his role and handle as the primary scorer for Ignite. In high school, as an energy big who did not have his handle tested consistently, Holland was able to make short roll passes on volume and the passing feel was extremely apparent.
Holland’s shooting mechanics do need some work, taking a deep dip and pushing his knees outward when organizing his shot to generate more energy into his release, accommodating for the strength required to shoot from NBA range. The positive signs with his shot are that he has touch and shooting versatility, shooting 73.7% from the free throw line and 37.5% on runners/hooks. Most young wings that are still new to shooting tend to shoot mostly catch-and-shoot shots but 36.4% of Holland’s 3-point shots are off the dribble. This degree of difficulty with his shot diet is a reason why Holland’s percentages are poor but these are excellent signs of shooting confidence and an indication that he will be able to threaten defenses with his jump shot relatively soon.
On the other side of the ball, Holland has the potential to be an all-defensive caliber wing, effectively guarding at the point of attack, as a help defender, and even some weakside rim protection using his high intensity, feel, and length. Holland’s tools and his rapid growth as a shooter over the past couple of years give me confidence that a lot of his flaws are low-hanging fruit that most young high-level wings deal with.
While these flaws may hamper him as a primary handler early on his rookie contract, Holland has an underrated floor as a second-side creator who can operate off of the gravity of a better creator using stampede and 45 cuts. If that proves to be too much, at the very least, he can provide his value as a roller, making short roll reads and contesting for offensive rebounds from the wing position. Teams may sag off of him, and we’ve seen this with the Thompson Twins and Kuminga, but this only gives Holland the runway to get downhill and create further advantages. This baseline of an offensive role and the defense he would provide from day one will give Holland the time and experience he’ll need to reach his higher-end outcomes as an advantage creator. His driving tools will open up the thresholds to improve as a shooter and handler over time. As a wing who will not turn 19 till after the draft, Ron Holland is a tantalizing bet with the first pick as a primary advantage creator who can also provide game-changing value as a versatile and dynamic defender.
Low Perspective
There’s a sort of utilitarian view of draft work that has emerged with access to more public, historical collegiate data. Herein lies a mechanistic view of development, governed by cause and effect: a particular distribution of traits yields a stronger likelihood to reach outcomes mapped by X precedents. Developmental discourse is carried out in light of this mechanistic view, portraying development as a system of inputs and outputs of a deterministic system.
Development, unfortunately, is not a sort of machine operating under fixed rules and established precedents. There is no such thing as a precedent in this draft shit, because each player is intrinsically, psychologically, biologically, and environmentally a highly unique individual. We see these individuals as simply data points to be managed and projected, rather than real, individualized humans with their own unique sets of traits and circumstances.
While this talking point is not particularly unique, often used to bash those who spew hurtful intel about teenagers or those who dehumanize prospects, the reductive nature of developmental discourse is also applicable on the other side of the coin. Quite simply, improvement is often a function of the widespread abstraction in the community, accompanied by a sort of hand waving once a prospect roughly follows a heuristics distribution of traits. Holland is young, he shoots free throws well, and he shoots FTs decently enough? He’ll shoot eventually. A player has strong steals and great touch on passes? They’re smart enough to figure it out. Unfortunately, projection nuance is often lost in the weeds of these reductive policies, leading to unnecessary guesswork and heuristical guessing.
Here’s the deal: Ron Holland will probably be a solid NBA player. Great defensive player, strong tools, great flashes, very young player. But moreso than any player I can remember Draft Twitter being high on, Holland has some of the most ridiculously broken offensive traits.
It’s hard to underscore just how broken Ron’s shot is. Yes, his FT% is decent, at 73%. But every single other facet of shooting is ridiculously poor.
Outside the arc, Ron’s struggles are important but widely understood. He shot 27/102 (25%) on the season. Typically, we see better marks on catch and shoots than dribble jumpers, but Ron was terrible at them all: 24% on guarded C&S, 28% on unguarded C&S, and 22% on dribble jumpers.
And unlike some other prospects who had poor shooting years but decent track records as shooters in high school, Ron has always been a poor 3P shooter. Even in his last EYBL season, Ron shot 29% from 3, even though half his attempts were unguarded C&S attempts (4/18 on unguarded C&S, 11/37 overall). He even shot 56% FT in those EYBL games. It’s cool to see Holland’s FT touch improve somewhat, but his shot hasn’t progressed as much as one would like to see.
Inside the arc, Ron shot 19/57 (33%). He shot 15/49 on dribble jumpers (31%). These are pretty bad, but they do not entirely eliminate him from goodness; they’re somewhat in line with other poor offensive wings in their teenage years. It gets worse, however: Ron was a whopping 8/30 on runners in the halfcourt, and shot 8/34 on all midrange jumpers (jumpers from 17 ft to the 3pt line), good for the 8th percentile. It’s hard to find a precedent for this level of terrible touch. There’s pretty much no aspect of shooting that Ron was even close to average in, let alone encouraging. And there’s no track record to fall back on, as there is for the likes of Isaiah Collier and Matas Buzelis.
What’s more worrying is how Ron got his looks. Ron was a monster rim pressurer, but a closer look at the numbers yields a troubling view of how he got his own. Ron had 48 dunk attempts this year, but only 10 were not in transition. Despite his perception as a bonafide creator, only around 22% of his 2P attempts came as PnR BH or in isolation; for context, even known transition merchant Jaylen Brown had about 29% of his 2P attempts come in PnR/isolation.
There’s no doubt that there are some clear positives. Ron rim numbers were still relatively strong in the HC, with a solid 54% rim percentage as compared to 60% at the rim including transition. He had 151 HC rim attempts in only 31 games, which is more rim attempts than most NCAA prospects get in the HC and in transition combined. He does have good touch on FTs. Yes, the 3P line is farther in the G-League, and yes he is one of the youngest prospects on Ignite. There are certainly some positive signs of improvement.
But at the same time, it’s important to avoid this mechanistic, cause-and-effect outlook on development that, despite some potentially debilitating weaknesses, Ron has a high ceiling and a decent chance at reaching that ceiling. I find it a bit odd when I see people try to use bart queries to prove that, because there were freshman prospects who shot poorly but had okay FT%s that ended up strong shooters, Ron similarly has a strong chance of overcoming these weaknesses. Well, for one, these queries don’t include a requisite level of nuance: how many of these prospects had a consistent record of shooting poorly on even unguarded C&S attempts stemming back to high school. More importantly, for every Kawhi Leonard and Jaylen Brown, there’s Johnny Davis, Killian Hayes, and Jarrett Culver. I’ve seen an abundant number of Ron Holland to Jaylen Brown comps, and while they may share some of the same weaknesses and strengths, Jaylen Brown is one of the most outlier developmental stories ever. We abstract basketball to such reductive lengths to prove to ourselves that Ron Holland has a strong chance of following some of the most inspiring developmental paths of all time, when in reality, these abstractions ignore the implicit expected value of the pathways themselves. Betting on the outlier pathways often associated with Holland’s projection intuits a much higher baseline of risk than that of a typical top three pick.
Projecting improvement is fundamentally a series of inevitable abstractions. But pretending like development is entirely projectable and frictionless is ridiculous. The 18 year old shooting 70% FT with strong stocks and high rim volume is a decent bet to improve and potentially return All-Star value. But the same player with a lackluster 53% TS, terrible on/offs, and utterly broken shooting, both inside and outside the arc, has a terrifyingly low floor. And while improvement seems like a good bet, overestimating the rewards of this bet is symptomatic of the mechanistic view of development that often leads to just as many false positives as true positives. It’s a bet I’m not as comfortable taking in the top 3.
High Perspective
Currently projected as a top 3 pick, Alexandre Sarr has maintained this elevated standing in draft projections in spite of an underwhelming season in the NBL playing for the Perth Wildcats, largely due to his tantalizing potential as a two-way modern big who could potentially space the floor and provide coverage diversity as a primary rim protector on defense. For as impactful an archetype as Sarr projects to be, how do we reconcile his lack of production with apparent physical tools? I believe the answer becomes clear when you look back through Sarr’s youth career, by taking a more expansive view of Sarr’s career the developmental trajectory becomes clear. In the 2021-22 Overtime Elite season, Sarr’s first against high level competition in the States, he average a paltry 6.4 points per game on 52% true shooting, shooting 43% from the line and 0.5 Assist-to-Turnover ratio. In his second season Sarr stepped into a larger role, posted virtually the same efficiency (51.8 TS%), saw a modest scoring increase to 9.8 PPG, but most importantly became more comfortable with the ball as evidenced by his A:TO improving to 0.72, and shot a significantly improved 52% from the line. This past season with Perth, Sarr averaged 9.6 PPG playing much better competition, was the most efficient he’d been to this point of his career with a 58.8 TS%, logged a 0.97 A:TO, and once again saw a massive jump in consistency from the line shooting 70.7%.
While Sarr’s minutes and production fluctuated over the course of this season in the NBL, his improvement over time has been consistent. Along with the obvious physical tools, the amorphous state of Sarr’s game currently should be viewed as a positive. While there has been speculation of Sarr desiring to only play the 4 moving forward, he has been deployed at both frontcourt spots in the past.This positional flexibility fulfills perhaps the most crucial requirement for a modern big man, he provides his team’s decision makers optionality when constructing the remainder of the roster. Sarr can play more on the wing as a compliment to a playmaking center and function as a vertical spacing outlet for wings who prefer to play downhill.
No matter how difficult it may be at the moment to project a fully formed role for Sarr, the confluence of persistent improvement and role malleability makes him well worthy of a top 3 pick.
Low Perspective
Alex Sarr has excited draft analysts with his unicorn potential. But how realistic is that expectation? To be a unicorn, you have to show tangible signs of perimeter skill in addition to interior dominance. Sarr does not completely pass either test.
On defense, he certainly has the perimeter skill. Sarr uses fluid movements to cover much ground and slide with drivers, flipping hips easily to take the best angle. But on offense it’s almost entirely theoretical. H le shot 29% on 49 catch and shoot threes and 28% on 8 pull-up threes. His proponents also call him a developing playmaker. That playmaking resulted in a mere 9% assist rate. Compare that to Evan Mobley’s 14% rate or Kyle Filipowski’s 18%.
He lacks the interior dominance on either side of the ball. This is best seen in his rebounding rates, less than that of Jaren Jackson Jr. in college, a poor rebounder in the NBA. He had one dunk per game, an okay but not elite number at 18 minutes per game. His block rates as well – good but not elite, and again falling short of his contemporaries.
Alex Sarr benefits a lot from looking unicorn-esque, but does not pass the tough tests to see if these skillsets hold up at the NBA level. He reminds one of a poor version of Jaren Jackson Jr., a useful NBA player but not worth a top 3 pick.
High Perspective
Rob Dillingham is a top-tier offensive talent who showed in Kentucky that he can thrive both on and off-ball. His versatility at the offensive end makes him arguably one of the best in this class at putting the ball in the basket. Dillingham has three-level scoring ability, being able to bomb away from three, while also using his electrifyingly tight and shifty handle to manufacture openings for himself in the mid-range or all the way to the paint where he can utilize his deadly accurate floater. From the pull-up game, to side-step and step-back jumpers, Dillingham is in the upper echelon in this class in from-scratch offensive creators. Dillingham also provides increased offensive malleability by proving to be as equally comfortable scoring on ball as he is he coming around pindowns and keeping the floor spread as an off-ball shooter, which is a value-add to his overall utility on that end.
Additionally, although he has the reputation of being a scoring-focused guard, Rob Dillingham is also a very proficient ball-mover who has all the passes in the book: laydown dishes along the interior, skip passes to the far weakside corner, and everything in between. He may not project immediately as a play-though point guard, but the potential is there, and even as he is now Dillinham can feature as a guard both capable of starting or coming off the bench, and slotting alongside both more and less ball dominant players. As combo guards go, Dillingham is on the higher end of the spectrum in regards to his passing ability, and is able to leverage that skill with the threat that his on-ball scoring and gravity off-ball can provide. For teams that need an injection of offense in a hurry, whether by scoring the ball directly or facilitating those opportunities for others, Rob Dillingham can answer the call.
Low Perspective
I love Rob Dillingham, and in fact has risen up my board since my ranking of him at the end of the lottery. But I still believe there is more risk to selecting a small guard near the top, even with his athletic talents.
The track record of first round picks with <2% offensive rebounding rate, <1% block rate and free throw rate under 30 is mediocre, with only Damian Lillard rising to All Star status. It is not impossible to add value even if not (Quentin Grimes, Marcus Sasser) but it does limit your upside unless you’re truly an elite shooter/passer.
Rob Dillingham looks like one of those elite shooter/passers, with 60% true shooting (!) and a 30% assist rate (!) while maintaining a 30% usage rate (!). He is one of the best athletes in the class, with shiftiness and accel/decel to get open in an instant. Despite the stature, he has still managed to dunk four times and got to the rim for over 100 attempts. All of the figures cited in this paragraph are among the top of our ‘small first round pick’ query.
Discerning Dilly’s level of feel is essential for taking him in the top five. His feel for passing out of his attacking is strong, knowing just when the help will arrive. But he is much less of a table-setter, functioning more as a small two guard. That is less of an issue as he is excellent shooting off of the catch, where he shoots 48% (!!) from three. His defensive feel is the greater concern, often losing track of his man but uses effort and speed to make up for his errors.
It has proven more difficult to speak to Dilly’s downside compared to the upside. He may not be your everything on offense, but he’s damn close to it. He might have the best touch in the class, and is almost definitely its best scorer. Draft Dilly.
High Perspective
Reed Sheppard is not TJ McConnell. He is not Payton Pritchard.
Look, I totally understand where these comparisons are coming from. You see a small point guard who can shoot lights out, while also generating turnovers at an exorbitant rate. Of course you think of the two cold white boys starring on the biggest stage that the Eastern Conference has to offer.
Well, what if I told you that Reed Sheppard isn’t even the runaway best shooter in the class. I would probably give that distinction to Jared McCain or maybe Baylor Scheierman. Reed had the 5th highest 3P% on his AAU team in 2022, and the 3rd highest 3P% on his AAU team in 2021.Reed’s on-ball defense isn’t particularly amazing either, as he had some concerning moments down the stretch of conference play especially.
So, if the 6’2 white boy with minimal wingspan isn’t as elite of a shooter as you thought, or as good of a defender as the stocks say, then why should anyone even remotely consider him top 5? What exactly is the purpose of taking such an “unathletic”, “low upside” player with such a high value lottery pick, especially if the strengths aren’t as strong as they statistically seem?
Let’s start with an objective truth: upside is based on precocious productivity.
We really need to stop with the 1:1 skill mapping. It’s useful, sure, but there’s a difference between projecting general productivity and projecting value propositions. Yes, Reed is going to be a great shooter, but how can we tell if he’s going to be a JJ Redick type specialist, a Payton Pritchard type halfcourt specialist, or a Dame Lillard type primary. What constitutes upside???
To me, there are certainly some elements of physical traits in ascertaining upside. But there’s an undeniable production aspect of upside that’s so much more profound than an amalgamation of skills. Being really goddamn good at age 19/20 is THE indicator of upside. Not to get too hyperbolic, but guys like Sengun, Jokic, Luka were all okay, unorthodox athletes but they were monster box score producers at age 19. Like historical/generational level good.
Reed isn’t quite that good, although he’s damn good himself. The reason I’m not a fan of the pritchard/tj mcconnell ~ reed comps is that he is infinitely better than those players at the same age. And, say it with me: being good at a young age (precocious productivity) is the absolute indicator of upside.
In every sense of the word, Reed Sheppard is a basketball savant. Not going to bore you with the statistical indicators but he has lightning quick release, mistake free passer, and just put up the best stocks for a guard in years despite +1 WS. I know there’s a certain faction of Twitter that hates anything to do with statistics, but Reed Sheppard just put up an 11 BPM season as a freshman on 70% TS for an entire season. He might move like Pritchard, he might defend like McConnell, but please stop it with the skill mapping: prospects are far more than their amalgamation of skills.
To quickly address some more concerns: Reed might have tanked the standing reach a bit for the vert, but 42 inch vert is legitimately nuts. And while Reed’s drive volume and general rim volume is a bit low, consider Kentucky’s offensive principles, based on shooting off screens and high runner volume: I would imagine that Reed’s volume of drives is a bit reduced by the floater volume, and while Reed’s 3P volume was good not great, remember that he had sparkling efficiency on 2p jumpers and that he was playing alongside a bevy of perimeter players. Rob Dillingham, Antonio Reeves, DJ Wagner, even Justin Edward were taking 3P touches away from Reed.
I’m not going to pretend I know exactly what kind of role Reed will play. I project a strong career by virtue of his precocious productivity, but role projection is hard as hell. I do think that Reed will be more of a midrange maestro in the league though. His pullup to release fluidity is lightning quick, exemplifying an underlying rapid processing ability (embodied decisionmaking for the win, look it up!).
To clarify, picturing how good a prospect will be by virtue of their skill distribution has its merits. All projections should be done within reason. But upside is fundamentally an extrapolation of development curves. and Reed is one of the most productive underclassmen of all time. Surely he has better median outcomes than TJ McConnell.
Low Perspective
Although Reed Sheppard has tremendous gifts and feel on the basketball court, there are also some weaknesses that could hamper him some at the next level. The first concern is his physical profile. At 6 ‘3 and a reported 190ish pounds with a short wingspan, Sheppard isn’t too small to play in the league, but it is a small concern, especially when paired with the fact that he is neither elite vertically or laterally compared to other guards in the association. Sheppard may have to compensate for that by following the play of similar players such as Fred VanVleet or Jalen Brunson, who physically play tougher and embrace contact despite or or even because of their relative stature, but even then, from a team construction standpoint, they are usually the only small guard on the floor, surrounded by bigger players that can assume roles that they can’t while they focus on being the driver of an efficient offense. Does Sheppard bring enough versatility to accommodate different lineups where he is, essentially, the only “point-guard sized” player on the floor?
In addition to playing more of a “tweener” role, Sheppard’s ideal offensive role is a slight question mark as well. Sheppard’s ball handling is best described as “functional” and although his passing and decision making are solid, is it enough for him to assume a role as a full-time ball handler? If not, Sheppard’s shooting and off ball movement are certainly spectacular, he does not have great individual shot creation skills at this time and isn’t exactly the type of player one would describe as a “walking paint touch”, and one has to consider if his ultimate outcome is that of an undersized off-ball floor spacer that can bring some limited value on the ball as a second-side facilitator. That archetype will almost certainly play a role in this league regardless, but it might be a determining factor when it comes to his overall ceiling as a player.
High Perspective
Donovan Clingan may be the best prospect in the 2024 draft. At 7’2’’ with a 7’7’’ wingspan and as mobile as a regular-sized big, Clingan is the best defensive prospect in the draft and fairly easily. The numbers are ridiculous: when he’s on the court, opponents shoot *44%* at the rim. Compare that to 50% against Evan Mobley at USC, 50% against Walker Kessler at Auburn or 46% against Chet Holmgren at Gonzaga. Clingan is in elite territory as a rim protector.
Mobile for size, Clingan is able to hedge near the level, excellent at backpedaling or turning to chase in fluid motions. This fluidity translates on offense, too, where he is perhaps the best screener in all of college basketball. That mobility also shows when he crashes the offensive glass, #6 in offensive rebound rate among high major players.
Clingan is a very high feel player, which shows in his ability to commandeer a defense, both reading actions early and calling them out. He has all you could want in a top rim protector besides the full switchability, but his high feel for the game allows him to make timely hedges, retreating and contesting with discipline. He is also a savvy passer, executing what’s needed in UConn’s structured, cut-heavy scheme to hit a 2:1 assist to turnover ratio.
With the top of the draft lacking a consensus #1, I’m happy to draft the clearcut best defensive prospect who also has avenues to contribute on the offensive end. While his touch lacks (54% from the free throw line), his size, movement ability and skill navigating the court will provide value. If he can build off of that offense with more roll opportunities (he only has 1.4/game at UConn) while continuing to work on his fitness to play big minutes, All-Defense and All-Star upside is well within reach. Bet on the size, mobility, feel and track record of production.
Low Perspective
Donovan Clingan is undoubtedly one of the best defensive prospects in this year’s class. He’s a monster rim protector with elite level size, good instincts, and discipline. His ability to function as an effective primary rim protector gives him a high floor and should make him playable from day one. The question with Clingan however, is if he’s too limited in other areas to have a high enough ceiling to justify a top draft pick.
Clingan’s lack of scoring touch/versatility is less than ideal for a big in today’s game. He doesn’t offer any scoring threat outside of 8 feet or so from the basket, and even when he’s in that range he doesn’t have the softest touch in the world. This wasn’t necessarily an issue for Clingan in college, but it does limit how teams can use him offensively in the NBA if he doesn’t improve in this area. He also played under 23 MPG this year after playing just 13 as a freshman. There are several theories/reasons for why his minutes were so low for a dominant player, but regardless you still would like to know for certain that he can handle a full NBA starter workload of minutes (30+ a game) if you’re going to invest a high draft pick in him.
There are also some questions around Clingan’s defensive versatility. He’s a monster drop coverage defender, but it’s less certain how well he’d fare in other P&R coverages – playing at the level, hard hedging, switching, etc. Even the best drop defenses in the NBA need to have the versatility to switch up at times, so proving that he has the mobility and conditioning to play more aggressive coverages will be key as well. All in all Clingan’s elite level rim protection gives him a high floor, but he’ll need to add more to his game to return value at the top of the draft.
High Perspective
The case for Zach Edey at the top of the draft is simple: he’s 7’4’’ and just put up the most productive college season since Zion Williamson. This season, Edey took 237 attempts at the rim this season and made 81% of them. His counter is his mid-range, where he took 226 attempts and made 95 (42%) of them. He also got fouled to the tune of 392 FTAs (an 85 free throw rate!), making 71%. He is as dominant as you can get on offense without taking threes. And with his level of touch, I wouldn’t rule those out, either.
Triple teams came often, giving Edey open outlet passes he can spot with his gargantuan size. His 15% assist rate has only been eclipsed by three other seven footer first round picks since 2008, exceeding the likes of Joel Embiid (12%) and Chet Holmgren (11%) while having a lower turnover rate than both. You can try to send extra help at the big man, but he will punish you. If you don’t, he will either score of snag an offensive board, getting his team an extra possession on nearly one of every five shot attempts.
Edey’s fitness has improved massively over his Purdue career, a point acknowledged by many in direction if not degree. Edey has played 30 minutes per game the past two seasons, and has increased his mobility out to the perimeter to set ample screens, flipping hips surprisingly well for his enormous frame. His balance stands out as able to move among other bigs to snag bad passes or out of the way for offensive boards while staying upright.
The obvious concern with Edey is his lack of scheme flexibility on defense, but I would argue the bigger priority is simply being effective on defense to begin with. It is difficult to not protect the rim at 7’4’’ with any modicum of mobility, and drop defense is still the PNR coverage of choice for most teams. Effective point of attack defense (lacking at Purdue) would mediate his difficulty covering large swathes of the midrange, but Edey has not been allergic to moving out to the perimeter when called upon.
Simply put, a big of his size who moves like he’s multiple inches shorter will be difficult to shoot over. When he’s on the court opponents shoot 9% worse at the rim than when he’s off, and with much lower rim frequency. Among seven-footers in the NBA, only Karl-Anthony Towns and Jaxson Hayes allow players to shoot better than their average at the rim.
Don’t overthink Zach Edey. Size is valuable for getting better shooting and passing angles, and Edey has the skill to take advantage of both. The defensive concerns are overblown for a player of his size (7’7’’ wingspan) who moves reasonably well. The payoff is potentially one of the most dominant offensive players in the league. His combination of production and efficiency is ultra-rare, to the point of being comfortably the top prospect in the 2024 draft on my board.
Low Perspective
Edey’s projection into the NBA is not as straightforward as his bevy of collegiate accolades would imply. when projected into the NBA landscape. He demonstrated a very specific form of dominance, a form of dominance that hasn’t been seen in the NBA for many years.
For instance, while Edey’s size is undeniably an asset, his overall mobility raises concerns, especially in an NBA that seems to value speed and versatility. He’s slower laterally, with a subpar 0.5% steal rate to boot. As such, he could be targeted in the PnR against quicker guards, especially those with a strong floater or middy. Purdue allowed a higher proportion of midrangers with Edey on the floor, but there’s just not as many college guards who can hit those kinds of shots with consistency. A corollary of this issue is that Edey’s effectiveness in space remains to be seen. The NBA is trending towards dynamic, versatile bigs who can defend both at the rim and on the perimeter. Edey seems more comfortable in drop, which could challenge his viability in high leverage, playoff matchups.
Additionally, Edey’s offensive bag at Purdue revolved significantly around his post-up play, a style that is less prevalent in the modern NBA. Teams prioritize spacing and perimeter shooting, and it remains unclear how effective he can be without a high usage or a postup heavy diet. His lack of a proven three-point shot could also result in spacing issues for his team, something that could be especially problematic in this five-out era. Purdue’s offense was also seemingly developed to maximize his strengths, and this is likely infeasible as he will not be drafted to be “the guy”. The adjustment from being a focal point of an offense to a more complementary role could dramatically decrease his effectiveness.
The NBA’s fast-paced style could also pose challenges for Edey, whose playstyle at Purdue was not characterized by high-tempo play. He rarely scored in transition, and his ability to keep up with the rapid transitions of the NBA, especially during long minutes, remains to be seen. Furthermore, there’s also just not a lot of recent precedent for players like Edey, i.e. players who dominated in college off a postup but lacked mobility to guard a variety of PnR coverages or shoot from deep.There are many harrowing examples of big men who could not adapt their games to the modern NBA, such as Roy Hibbert and Andrew Bynum.
Ultimately, teams considering Edey will need to weigh these factors against his indubitable strengths to evaluate whether they can provide a viable ecosystem for him to overcome these challenges and adapt to the pace-and-space NBA.
High Perspective
As the #1 player in the 2023 recruiting class, Isaiah Collier entered the year with huge expectations. His stock has been up and down since then with USC struggling this season and many pointing to concerns with shooting and turnovers as reasons to be skeptical of Collier. Despite this, he remains the best primary ball handler prospect in this year’s draft due to a rare blend of skills and pedigree.
Collier wins with a mixture of high end burst off the dribble and legitimately elite level strength for a teenage guard. He’s able to generate easy paint touches against all types of different defenders, as a majority of guards don’t have the strength to match up with him and most wings lack the footspeed to stay in front. And while he is limited a bit by a lack of vertical athleticism as a finisher, he compensates for that by being able to play through contact at a high level below the rim + having a high free throw rate on drives due to his sheer physicality. Collier is also one of the best passers in the class which pairs well with his ability to easily break down a defense, allowing him to consistently create quality shots for teammates regardless of the spacing around him.
.
And while there is some validity to the shooting/turnover questions, a lot of those concerns have been blown out of proportion. Collier has always been a competent shooter off the dribble dating back to high school, and he really doesn’t need to be much better than “solid” at the NBA level with how good he is as a slasher. He does need to improve as a spot-up shooter, but it’s not like he’s someone defenses can just ignore and forget about – he’s plenty capable of knocking down open shots. As for the turnovers, those were mostly a product of early season struggles. He averaged more than 5 turnovers through his first 6 games, but after that he cut that down to 2.7 through the final 21 games. That latter number is completely normal and acceptable for a freshman guard asked to do as much as Collier was.
Overall it’s true that Collier does have clear improvements he needs to make in order to maximize his skillset, but you shouldn’t miss the forest for the trees with him. He’s the best primary ball handler bet in a class devoid of star upside, making him someone easily worth a top 5-10 draft pick this year.
Low Perspective
Collier entered the season in top 5 conversations, but his stock has declined considerably. At 6’5” 210 lbs, Collier boasts an exceptional blend of strength and power. He gets to his spots in the paint at will, evidenced by his 3.46 unassisted rim makes/40, a higher mark than Kira Lewis, Jaden Ivey, Shai, and other recent highly-regarded paint mavens. Collier is capable of using his rim pressure threat to set up open teammates for easy dump-off/kick-outs, though he doesn’t see every window.
My concern is that for a prospect whose sales pitch revolves around self-creation ability, the off-the-dribble package that Collier currently offers has holes. Is he the type of decision-maker you want carrying a high half-court usage rate? While his turnover numbers decreased as the season progressed, he’s still prone to slinging inaccurate passes or losing his handle versus pressure and digs. And while he didn’t have a poor shooting season, he only hit 28.6% (10/35) of his pull-up threes. It’s also worth noting that while Collier is an electric first-step athlete, he may be challenged vertically against NBA athletes, recording 0 half-court dunks at USC. Defensively, I’ve been unimpressed with Collier’s attentiveness, though he certainly has the physicals to excel on that end.
I still like Collier in the late lotto range – his burst and strength are legitimate NBA-level skills, and his spot-up jumper has developed nicely. However, it’s more likely that he’s a closeout attacker/secondary creator rather than a blue chip lead guard.
High Perspective
When you talk about drafting in the lottery, you are talking about taking chances on players with a path to success. Matas is my number one prospect in this draft because I believe in his upside on both sides of the floor. Offensively, there is a ton to like, starting with his feel for playing in the halfcourt and quick processing flashes. He uses his length well to create passing angles, and if the opposing team rotates while he attacks, he makes quick dump-off passes to his teammates for easy finishes. In transition, you can trust him to make the right reads because he always keeps his head up; I’ve also seen him make lovely lob passes to teammates while going at full speed. The shooting is something I believe will get better, with some optimism coming from his high school tape and free throw shooting percentage. Matas also has a mid-range level bag that he can lean on due to his length and jumper. His defensive acumen is also a big-time sell. When watching him play, you see him make the proper rotations on time, and he always seems to know where to go in different scenarios. Also, he has a knack for producing in the stocks category, tying with Ron Holland for first with 97. Matas is a 6’10 wing, with most of his shortcomings being strength, which is very much fixable. He’s my number 1 prospect due to the combination of talent in this draft, but he has a high floor and a clear floor that can help good teams win.
Low Perspective
“Matas will shoot better than his G League percentages” has basically been taken as gospel at this point. That would be nice, of course, and would allow Buzelis to fit into a nice three and D archetype.
But the hard facts of Buzelis on the court are a bit more grim, Of all the Igniters, Buzelis had the worst all-in-one stats with -0.6 win shares (Holland was -0.2), with 52.5% true shooting on 22% usage and generally poor productivity across the board. The exception was his shot blocking, a legitimate strength that should have some NBA translation.
It is an open question, I think, how well Buzelis’ athleticism would hold up against NBA athletes. He can be dynamic in a straight line, with a good dunk rate in the G League. But has some stiffness of hips preventing him from turning quickly or sliding in lockstep with his offensive assignment. He can recover back nicely, but Buzelis is unlikely to be a lockdown one on one defender.
What’s left is a Bobby Portis type, a useful NBA role player. But I struggle to see where the upside is beyond that, and therefore I believe not deserving of a lottery pick.
High Perspective
Zaccharie Risacher is someone who checks off a lot of boxes in terms of what teams look for in wings. He’s not the best creator but he’s a good shooter with versatility, has high level positional size, and can really move his feet defensively on the perimeter. He also was productive this year in a pretty high level pro league in France, including a great showing in his teams playoff run, showing that he’s someone close to being ready to contribute in the NBA rather than just an “in theory” upside swing.
Part of what makes Risacher such a valuable draft prospect is his archetype. As a 6’10 wing with a smoother jumper and the foot speed to guard multiple positions on the perimeter, good players in his mold are incredibly hard to acquire in trades or free agency. With just a little bit of strength and creation development, Risacher becomes a supremely valuable player that’s highly coveted across the league – making him worthy of a high draft pick this year.
Low Perspective
Zaccharie Risacher is not an exceptional prospect no matter the lense you use to view his skillset. As a 3&D wing, Risacher lacks persistent off-ball awareness and has a lackluster wingspan of only 6’9.5’’. His three point ball is strong at 39% shooting of 3.7 three point attempts per game, but not convincingly elite, especially with only 71% shooting from the line.
Risacher cannot be viewed as a pure shotmaker, either. When closely guarded on catch and shoot attempts (only 35% of the time), Risacher’s three point percentage drops to only the 67th percentile. He only had eight isolations all season, and only 37 pick and roll possessions where the defense commits. He simply did not take up a heavy share of difficult offensive possessions. Risacher was mostly just an open catch and shoot finisher, as far as plus efficiency shot types.
My preferred method to evaluate prospects is to look at production x feel x athleticism. Risacher’s athletic testing was awful, with a mere 31 inch max vertical and one of the slowest sprints. His feel is okay, losing his assignment here and there on defense and only maintaining a 0.6 ATO on offense. His production is just okay, with okay usage and okay rebounding, very poor assisting and decent stocks rates. But putting it all together you certainly do not get a top pick.
Risacher falls into an archetype I’m not too fond of: stationary spot up shooters. His handle is the swing skill, holding him back from being a pull-up shooter or from exploring more territory to become a playmaker from others. Maybe this will grow with time, but the ancillary skills aren’t great either.
High Perspective
One, if not the most sought out skill at the top of the draft is advantage creation which is Topic’s main selling point. Whilst not being a vertical threat, Topic is able to really pressure the defense at the rim with both elite volume and efficiency. For Serbian side Mega MIS, he created over 7 rim attempts per game, which is the highest mark for a guard sized player in this year’s draft class, while shooting 68% at the rim. Whilst he is no vertical threat on his drives, his overall level of craft and horizontal athleticism is at a really high level. His ballhandling was at a high enough level to create from a standstill and showcase his advanced ability to carve his way to the rim in various situations.
Technically, Topic is a fantastic passer, being able to throw it with both hands on the move, being able to hit quite tight windows and see open teammates in any situation. His decision-making process when passing is more strict and system oriented. Whilst he is able to rip open the whole defensive construct with his drives, he isn’t always aware of how to manipulate the defender by himself to open passing angles. On the other hand, he knows exactly how and when certain windows are there within the system. Nothing wrong with being a more “academy brained” played, but to keep in mind as it could limit him in certain situations.
On surface level, Topic’s shooting numbers look a bit concerning. He only hit around 30% of his threes during his time for Mega MIS, which leads many to question his ability to punish defenses, especially going under in screening actions and limiting his ability to go downhill. Under the hood, there is plenty of room for optimism. Aside from his below average 3 point efficiency, his touch indicators are really impressive. He’s an 87.9% free throw shooter for his career on 265 attempts. His 3P% this season is influenced by him taking over half of his attempts off the dribble, while he only hit 4/20 on unguarded catch and shoot threes per synergy during his time with Mega MIS which drags his percentage down a bit.
On defense, there is some room for optimism. Overall, I would consider Topic a pretty high feel player and with an well above average court mapping ability which leads me to believe he’ll find a way to contribute on defense eventually. His size will surely help, but will be mitigated with his neutral wingspan. He was quite solid against taller players when engaged.
Low Perspective
Nikola Topic’s draft stock has remained relatively steady throughout the cycle, after being vaunted into a top 10 draft slot in the midst of a stellar start to his season with KK Mega Basket. Topic’s ‘sell’ to this point, has primarily been as a dynamic ball-handler, one who has demonstrated impressive nuance in the Pick-and-Roll, especially for what should be the youngest player in the draft class (August ‘05 birthday). Topic’s production in a competitive league, especially relative to his age, is undeniably impressive. Serving the role of offensive engine for a team is nothing to sneeze at, and the manner in which Topic has been able to drive offense for Mega is perhaps what has elevated his standing amongst the draft community the most. The number of passing deliveries Topic has at his disposal is truly remarkable, capable of making quick and accurate passes with either hand, Topic has drawn early comparisons to other foreign pick-and-roll maestro’s such as Goran Dragic and Luka Doncic already. The versatile deliveries, in concert with his timing, helps Topic capitalize on small windows while limiting turnovers, as evidenced by his pristine 2.27 Assist/Turnover ratio and 1.42 Assist/Usage ratio. Shouldering as heavy a creation burden as Topic does while maintaining efficiency (60 TS%) and limiting turnovers are undeniable indicators of a prospect with the makings of a NBA lead guard.
However, in evaluating guard prospects and how they’ll adapt to an NBA context, it is paramount to consider scalability. Scalability being the player’s ability to toggle through roles and provide consistent impact. The efficiency threshold player’s need to cross in order to see primary usage is exceedingly high. Personally I am skeptical Topic will make the ball-handling and pull-up shooting developments necessary to reach these heights. As it stands over the course of the 23-24 season, including FIBA u18 competition, Topic has shot 26.3% on pull-up 2’s (19 attempts) and 25.9% on pull-up 3’s (54 attempts). For a player who’s preferred usage is as an on-ball initiator, shooting off the dribble is crucial to maintaining and eventually improving offensive potency as Topic transitions into the league. While some may argue Topic could be excluded from typical ball-handler expectations with how persistent and effective he is getting downhill, both as a playmaker and a finisher (Topic finished 67% at the rim with 4.9 rim attempts/game), I do not see Topic as possessing the kind of transcendent athleticism a 6’5 guard would need to boast to function in this way. While Topic has been extremely efficient finishing at the rim, he wasn’t able to convert any of these rim attempts into dunks, and only had a 34% free-throw-rate, which can be representative of how overwhelming the rim pressure being applied is.
In summation, I am concerned Topic may lack the offensive depth to transition into a primary ball-handling role due to his limitations shooting off-the-dribble, and does not have the shooting bonafides to be seamlessly placed into an off-ball role. Defensively Topic will undoubtedly be targeted early in his career, as most rookies are. However, I am skeptical Topic will see equal improvements to his peers due to his frame and lapses off-ball. These warts were all the more apparent is Topic’s brief stint playing the highest level competition in Europe when he was called up by his team’s parent club, KK Crvena Zvezda. During EuroLeague competition teams were consistently running action directly towards Topic, either for the man he was initially guarding or in hopes of getting Topic involved in the play via switch. At the moment it does not seem that Topic has the defensive awareness to compensate for his suboptimal tools. Ultimately Topic’s game is a compelling combination of creative passing and downhill playmaking, this I feel was instinctively extrapolated towards transforming Topic into a primary playmaker sell. When in reality I believe Topic doesn’t meet the criteria in a few categories which are integral to existing in that exclusive air. However, this does not mean I am dubious of Topic being worth a lottery pick, rather I think his skillset will have a more narrow application in the NBA.
High Perspective
Kyle Filipowski was one of three underclassmen to score a 10 Box Plus-Minus or better, the other two being likely top five picks Donovan Clingan and Reed Sheppard. For some reason, Filipowski has fallen out of the lottery.
The scary stuff for Filipowski’s bust odds is his short wingspan. His 6’10.5’’ length is the same as that of 6’3’’ Trey Alexander, and shows up on both ends of the court. When he’s trying to finish at the rim he struggles to access the best angles. His 25 dunks were one fewer than 6’2’’ Devin Carter.
But Filipowski still managed to contribute in every single area on the court. He is a very strong rebounder, has unusually high assist rate for a big, can space the floor (35% shooting on 6 threes per 100 possessions) and drive to the basket. He can set screens and grab steals.
There are simply not many 6’11’’ players in the world who can dribble, pass and shoot from the perimeter. Filipowski is unlikely to be a good enough athlete to be a strong defender, his dribble pass shoot ability combined with production at age mean some elite outcomes are on the table. While the most likely path is still just good role player, the possibility of striking gold with Filipowski should be too convincing to pass him up after the lotto,
Low Perspective
I was surprised to learn that I was the lowest of the Swish group on Filipowski, a player who I’ve been a fan of for the past few seasons. The variance was low on where he found himself on our team’s boards, but that doesn’t mean that this is a straight-forward evaluation. Filipowski is one of the more unique big prospects in recent memory, a physically limited player with an undeniable skillset. I struggle to see who he defends in the NBA. His arms are too short to provide high-level deterrence at the rim (6’10.5” wingspan/7’0” in shoes) and while he has his nimble moments, I’d rather him not chase offensive players around the perimeter all game.
Offensively is where things get interesting. Filipowski’s comfortability and flexibility as a ball-handler are impressive, and while his finishing is limited by his short reach and subpar vertical, I love his strength and contortion-ability in the paint. Filipowski’s passing is by far his most interesting trait, with the vision and coordination to initiate offense from the perimeter and make reads on the move. Shooting will determine how impactful his offense will be, and while I’m generally optimistic of his open-shot-making ability, he’s a career 71.8% free throw shooter and 31.4% 3-point shooter. Even if his efficiency from range improved this year, his touch isn’t a sure thing.
I like Filipowski’s chances of sticking around in a 6th/7th man role that can provide instant offense off the bench. However, I think his physical limitations put a real cap on his ceiling.
High Perspective
Devin Carter was dominant on both ends of the floor at Providence this year, averaging 19.8 points, 8.7 rebounds, 3.6 assists, 1.8 steals, and 1.0 blocks per game. While it’s unlikely that he will serve as the offensive engine he was for the Friars, his all-around skill set should translate nicely to the next level. Carter is an instant impact defensive player, feisty at the point of attack and nimble and strong enough to blow through screens. He plays much bigger than his 6’3” size, with the functional strength and length to guard up on larger players.
The other end of the floor is where most of the questions arise. Carter had two years shooting sub-30% from three before popping off to 37.7% on 11.2 attempts/100. Is the efficiency spike real, or merely the product of a hot shooting stretch? I buy Carter’s shot – the volume, versatility, and confidence he displayed this year pop off the screen. I was also impressed by his ability to penetrate defenses off the bounce, frequently blowing by defenders with raw speed, while also showing the patience to weave his way to his spots in the paint.
Carter has all the makings of a star role player – a guy with tangible NBA skills and more than enough athletic juice to hang on the floor.
Low Perspective
Devin Carter was a two-way engine for the Providence Friars this year, with a high offensive workload while creating events to a high degree on the other end (2.8 BLK%, 2.9 STL%). As an older prospect who measured at 6′ 2.25”, questions arise on how effectively his production as a smaller player will translate to the NBA.
While Carter showed a lot of growth as a shooter, mixing in a lot of new versatility like range pull-ups from the perimeter, this is his first real season shooting the ball efficiently at 37.7% on 11.2 3PA/100. In his two previous seasons, he shot 29.9% and 28.1% on 6.5 and 5.8 3PA/100 respectively. That in conjunction with his free throw shooting cracking above 70% for the first time his sophomore year and 28.8% on midrange shots gives some trepidation for his long-term shooting projection.
As a defender, he is good at the point-of-attack at the college level but mostly relies on his recovery tools like ground coverage and massive wingspan (6′ 8.75”) rather than lateral explosion. For this reason, I believe Carter will be more of a lock-and-trail defender which will accentuate his recovery tools, but not elite at stopping penetration from the perimeter. He should also be able to scale to an off-the-catch scoring role which should help with his shooting efficiency at the next level with an easier shot diet.
Overall, Devin Carter should be able to scale as an undersized wing who plays much bigger because of his tools but he will have issues on both sides of the ball, especially if he’s placed in a role where he has to consistently guard at the point of attack and an offensive load that’s closer to his role as a junior with the Friars.
High Perspective
Imagine telling someone before the season that Tyler Smith would be the most productive player on an Ignite team with arguably the two best prospects of the 2023 class inMatas Buzelis and Ron Holland, and the most accomplished FIBA youth player in Izan Almansa (fresh off an MVP at FIBA U19s). And to be honest, it wasn’t particularly close: Tyler was the most efficient/productive player on Ignite by quite a bit. And yet, Tyler is still being mocked far below his teammates. Here’s why I think that’s a bit ridiculous.
It’s really hard to emphasize just how efficient Tyler was. While he did come off the bench, Tyler led Ignite with 25 points per 40 minutes on 62% TS. To be clear, Tyler isn’t a particularly strong self creator: he excels as an uber-efficient playfinisher.
We often have a pre-established schema of playfinishers: typically, these are bigs with large catch radii and explosiveness, able to dunk on someone’s head or catch lobs to “finish” the play at the rim. But think about it for a second: is a dunk at the rim really the only way to end a possession? Personally, I think Tyler’s shotmaking is a unique form of playfinishing. With his rapid release and strong versatility, Tyler is able to pick and pop with the best of them. He’s not bothered by contests and he shoots with extremely high volume. Make no mistake: Tyler is not just a traditional playfinisher, but in the truest sense of the term, Tyler Smith is the ultimate play finisher.
It’s his immense efficiency from all over the floor that makes me so high on Smith. Sure, his shot diet is largely assisted, with a limited ability to self-create and a weak handle to boot, but there just aren’t very many players strong enough to finish inside and make difficult shots from the perimeter. He tested remarkably well, coupling a strong frame with 7’1 WS and a 38 inch max vert. He’s a force on the glass, with a strong 8% offensive rebounding rate, and has also shown flashes as a rim protector.
There are real concerns with Tyler on defense. But he’s productive, athletic, and provides a well-rounded scoring ability that isn’t common for guys his size. He’s shown the ability to showcase efficiency and productivity in ridiculously unstructured environments, shooting nearly 50% from the field and putting up gaudy scoring numbers in both OTE and the G-League despite high perimeter volume. It’s hard to go wrong with a productive, athletic freshman-aged wing who can really shoot.
Low Perspective
While Tyler Smith no doubt has intriguing skill as a knockdown shooter at 6’10, there’s a ton of areas he needs to improve on in order to return value as a top 20 pick. For one he badly needs to get stronger. Being 6’10 is nice, but Tyler will have to add a lot of physicality in order to functionally take advantage of his size. Right now he lacks the strength to consistently back down smaller defenders, rebound at a high level, or defend 1v1 against physical posts or slashers. On top of this he has a pretty limited handle and doesn’t read the floor at a high level, limiting his chances of ever being a high level connector or option out of the short roll. Overall there’s a lot of areas Tyler needs to improve on in order to be more than just a shooter offensively, and he doesn’t project to add much value back on the defensive side without real strength development or better feel as a help defender.
It’s definitely possible that Smith improves in some of these areas, and if he does there’s a path to being a nice rotation piece as a big shooter that can space the floor. There are just a lot of different deficiencies in his game right now that could derail his development to feel totally comfortable using a high draft pick on him.
High Perspective
The Australian freshman phenom hit the draft scene by splashing shots from distance for the Kansas Jayhawks. The 6′ 10″ wing began the season slowly integrating into the Kansas system, and by the New Year, Furphy was starting games and showcasing his versatility at that size. Furphy can shoot the ball, mostly above 40% for the season but with a rough shooting stretch to end the season, it caused him to end on 36% at 9 3PA/100. He’s shot mostly catch-and-shoot on a 60.7 3-point rate overall at Kansas, but he’s shown some real versatility with movement and off-the-dribble shots mixed into his shooting arsenal pre-college.
However, Furphy is far from just a shooter and has several NBA skills: the ability to attack tilted defenses off-the-catch, get to the line, grab offensive rebounds, attack the rim relentlessly in transition, make quick connective reads, and show intensity on the defensive side of the ball. Only five freshmen standing at 6’7″ or taller have shown this level of versatility, shooting over 8 three-point attempts per 100 possessions, maintaining an offensive rebounding rate above 5%, a free throw rate exceeding 35%, and both block and steal percentages surpassing 1%, all while maintaining a Box Plus/Minus (BPM) above 5: Gordon Hayward, Kris Middleton, Jontay Porter, Brandon Ingram, and Johnny Furphy. When drawing up queries like this, it’s crucial to minimize the use of numerous thresholds to avoid contriving the data towards a particular perspective. However, in this case, I wanted to showcase how Furphy’s production in multiple facets of basketball fares against other freshmen.
The ability to be versatile and adapt quickly to what your team needs at a young age can be a sign of unorthodox creation pathways, and that may be a reason why eventual full-fledged NBA creators like Hayward, Middleton, and Ingram show up in this query.
Furphy may have mostly played an off-ball role at Kansas but he has unique movement skills and functional strength for a 6’ 9” freshman at 202 pounds, using lower-half flexibility with his shin angles to create leverage as a driver. The combination of these traits and real on-ball reps in his pre-college sample showcased that he has the potential for more equity on the ball in the league with continued physical development. With a high floor as a play finisher and connective wing at 19, the potential to have more upside on-ball makes Furphy a strong bet for teams in the lottery.
Low Perspective
Johnny Furphy is a winning prospect. He’s a true freshman who provided undeniably positive value for the Kansas Jayhawks this year. At first glance, he appears to project as a prototypical wing bet: he’s a strong shooter (36% 3P on 9 3s/100), and an incredibly efficient playfinisher (11 dunks, a whopping 80%!!! at the rim). He’s also productive to boot, with a solid 5.4 bpm and excellent on/off splits (+9.8 net rating swing). A freshman who finishes well, can shoot on volume, and demonstrably positive on-court value should theoretically be a fine bet to make.
And I agree; generally, this seems like a strong pick. However, taking a deeper look under the hood yields some concerns that may have been understated by his productivity.
Let’s start with the finishing. Furphy appears to be an excellent finisher. 11 dunks on the year, and he shot 44/55 (80%) at the rim this season. This is utterly ridiculous and higher than many centers’ percentages. And yet, a whooping 82% of Furphy’s rim attempts were assisted. To be quite frank, I have never seen a drafted wing prospect with even 75% of their rim attempts assisted, let alone 80+. A cursory search of barttorvik yields about ~8-10 guys a year who take 50 shots at the rim and shoot > 80% assisted, and they are almost exclusively non-prospect centers. So while the play finishing sticks out statistically, there seem to be some initial concerns about context.
More concerningly, Furphy’s rim attempts appear to be strongly inflated by transition play. Per Synergy (which includes an extra game so excuse the slightly different numbers), 29 of Furphy’s 49 makes were in transition. 9 of Furphy’s 12 dunks were in transition. This is atypical of most wings; even accounting for low usage, lack of early opportunity, only 18 rim attempts in the half court over the course of 33 games for a wing billed as a playfinisher is ridiculously low volume. In tandem, Furphy’s 2P shotmaking diet was strongly driven by assisted/transition plays: 39 of his 52 total 2s were either in transition (29), off cuts (8), or putbacks (2). This is a remarkably high volume, and makes me wonder how much of Furphy’s finishing goodness is driven by context. He is a decisive driver, but not particularly explosive.
I took a look at his pre-college tape and it is a bit more intriguing, but some of the questions remain. The Center of Excellence stretch in particular was concerning, as he shot under 50% at the rim. It was a bit more self creation, but still not very inspiring stuff. He looked a bit more explosive, but generally, the finishing was not good. A stark difference from his Kansas playfinishing goodness.
Furphy projects to be a strong playfinishing wing. That is part of his pitch. Well, he’s a beneficiary of context, but what makes me more concerned is that he also doesn’t appear to be an adequate athlete for this niche. There are some good signs: 6.6 oreb% is strong, and while he only had 3 hc dunks total for a guy with so many scripted cuts, is it really that bleak? Furphy tested quite poorly: 6 feet 7.5 inches is good height but only +1 WS. Vertically was more bleak, as Furphy tested 64th and 65th out of 77 players in standing vertical and max vertical, respectively. His closest vertical doppelgangers were Jared McCain, Zach Edey, Tristen Newton, and Zaccharie Risacher. A subpar vertical athlete with +1 WS is just disappointing testing results for a player not proven to handle a high volume of finishing burden.
Then there’s the matter of his shooting. Furphy ended the season shooting 77% on FTs and 36% from 3P on 9 3s/100. These are objectively strong numbers. But again, under the hood yields some concerns regarding context. For one, 98% of his 3s were assisted. More importantly, Furphy failed to shoot with any semblance of versatility. Much of this can be attributed to poor lower body strength, which may have been attributed to a case of early season shin splints. Nonetheless, the fact of the matter is that 118 of Furphy’s 125 3s were catch and shoot, and a whooping 84 of Furphy’s total threes were spotup attempts. He shot a strong 43% on these attempts, but its his struggles on non-spotup jumpers that really concerns me.
In basically every facet of non spotup shot making, Furphy struggled. Sure, we can ignore many of these facets by virtue of small sample size. But Furphy shot 2 for 19 on 3Ps off handoffs. He shot 1 for 6 on 3Ps off dribble jumpers. Even inside the arc, Furphy shot a putrid 3 for 14 on non-rim 2s per Synergy. There’s an intrinsic aspect of dynamic decision making involved in non-spotups, requiring a high level of understanding and body control. He demonstrates a loose handle and is unable to get into a fluid pullup. How good of a shooter is Furphy really?
Not that defense is a strong suit of Furphy’s but I was a bit disappointed by his on-ball defense. His stocks are okay (1.5% block, 2% steal), but he gets beat off the dribble quite a bit, somewhat slow feet, and struggles navigating screens in the thick of conference play. Probably not going to be a great defensive player, but it’s worth mentioning.
To top things off, Bill Self does not have the best track record of prospects selected in the t20, particularly wings. Take a look at the most recent Kansas players drafted in the top 20: Julian Wright, Brandon Rush, Cole Aldrich, Xavier Henry, Marcus and Markieff Morris, Thomas Robinson, Ben McLemore, Andrew Wiggins, Joel Embiid, Kelly Oubre, Josh Jackson, Ochai Agbaji, and Gradey Dick. In particular, the hit rate on wings is terrible. I posit that this is partially driven by context: one proclivity of the Self offense is the high number of baseline cuts to the rim, which often inflates the Kansas wings’ dunk totals. A great contemporary example of this is KJ Adams, who was similarly outlierishly high in rim assisted rate both this year and last year.
While Furphy is almost undeniably a beneficiary of context, it’s still difficult to ignore how good he’s been. The question for me is how he projects to the NBA. Again, the pitch with Furphy is as a hyper efficient playfinishing wing with strong shooting upside. The playfinishing numbers look good, but they are strongly inflated by transition and assisted plays, and Furphy isn’t a great athlete. The 3P shooting numbers are solid but likely inflated by virtue of the high spotup proportion. Furphy’s numbers on non spotup jumpers are pretty terrible. And most importantly, it’s important to question the contextual benefits given the history of Kansas wings under Bill Self. I cannot fade a strongly productive freshman wing too much, but given Furphy’s badness outside the context (poor Center of Excellence finishing numbers, poor athletic tools, poor nonspotup efficiency, poor shooting versatility, poor on-ball defense), Furphy seems more of a project than at first glance. And a project with such limited on-ball juice and athletic goodness presents a contentious value proposition for a first round pick.
High Perspective
Stephon Castle meets an obvious threshold for NBA relevance: he has an Offensive Box Plus Minus and Defensive Box Plus Minus both above 2 while being a high major freshman. That simple query has been as useful as any in finding future NBA players, with the likes of Franz Wagner, Anthony Black and Isaac Okoro with similar impact metrics to Castle.
You have to take likely NBA players where you can get them, and Castle more than looks the part. We have already seen him perform essential functions for national champion Connecticut Huskies, often taken on the toughest defensive assignment while being a tertiary creator on offense.
It is a fair question how likely Castle is to develop Primary Stuff over his career, but Castle has the instincts to try. He is one of the highest feel players in his class, then put into a 6’5.5’’ body and given a 6’9’’ wingspan. His baseline of dribble and pass skill combined with good rim finishing allows him to rove around the court looking for an angle. Even though the shot is a work in progress, Castle has been able to seek out driving angles here and there.
A strong defender with elite production compared to his peers and some athletic strengths (though he has poor foot speed generally, Castle also managed 23 dunks in 34 games), Castle likely has a decent floor. The upside is around his ability to run pick and roll and how much his shot can come around. I am highly optimistic on the former and have not given up on the latter.
Low Perspective
Stephon Castle undoubtedly has one of the most impressive resumes of any prospect this year. He came into UConn as a top-15 recruit, fit in nicely around the Huskies stars while impacting the game in multiple areas, and even helped win a National Championship. While it’s hard to argue against what Castle has been able to do up to this point, there is reason to be concerned with how his game translates to the NBA.
The glaring weakness with Castle is his lack of a perimeter jumper. He finished the season shooting a lowly 26/100 overall on jumpers, and the numbers aren’t any better when you break them down further. Castle was below 30% on essentially every type of jumper, including a ghastly 24% on open C&S 3’s- the most important shot for his projected NBA role.
A natural counter argument is that we have seen plenty of prospects at Castle’s age (19 on draft night) recover from poor shooting seasons as freshman and pan out fine in the NBA, but the way teams guarded Castle might be even more concerning than the numbers. It wasn’t at all uncommon for teams to give Castle the “Ben Simmons treatment”, sagging 5+ feet off him when he’s behind the 3pt line and almost begging him to shoot a jumper. He was able to still be very impactful as a college player playing in a sort of Nuggets Aaron Gordon type role as a smart cutter and bully ball handler, but he doesn’t have close to the size or athleticism needed to play like that at the NBA level without significant shooting improvement.
It’s certainly easy to understand the intrigue around Castle with his combination of size, feel, ball handling ability and overall pedigree. However, the unfortunate reality that we’ve seen over and over again in the NBA is that ultimately his jumper will need to improve significantly – both from a results and confidence standpoint – or else it threatens to drag down the rest of his game in the NBA.
High Perspective
One of two highly touted freshmen at Baylor this season, Yves Missi fits a classic big man archetype as an athletic rim runner/protector big. Yves still has a lot to improve on from a strength/technique standpoint (he’s still relatively new to basketball), which is why it’s impressive that he’s already as impactful as he is as a defender. His combination of length/athleticism/motor can be overwhelming at times and lets him defend both in space and on the interior. One of the most impressive prospect games I watched this cycle was when Missi leveraged his tools to completely shut down Kyle Filipowski in an early season matchup against Duke.
While Yves is currently pretty limited offensively, I still think he’s overall a solid offensive prospect for a Center. Right now he’s mainly an offensive rebound/dunker spot/roll man style big, but he’s already legitimately very good at all those things: His near 15% O-Reb% is one of the better marks among HM freshman in the past decade, and he finished above 70% of his shots at the rim as a P&R roll man. The most intriguing part of his offensive game though might be the flashes of faceup drives against slower footed bigs. His handle and ability to read the floor are still both raw, but his first step is extremely quick for someone his size and the overall fluidity he shows in these situations looks like something he can build off of with more reps/experience and unlock further upside.
Yves still has a lot of rawness to his game on both ends of the floor, but it’s hard to not be excited about his tools and the trajectory he’s on. His rim running, offensive rebounding, and rim protection give him a relatively easy pathway to being a useful role player early on in his career, while the rare flashes of perimeter slashing and versatile P&R defense for someone his size/age give him more upside than a majority of bigs in his archetype. That package ultimately makes him a very good Center prospect and someone well worth a lottery pick this year.
Low Perspective
With only a few years of playing basketball under his belt, I want to give Yves Missi the benefit of the doubt regarding his skill progression. But the fact of the matter is that he has many items to clean up before becoming viable on an NBA floor, and that could take a couple of years to get there.
While Missi is not tasked with passing much in the Baylor offense, his 3.5% assist rate and 0.3 assist to turnover ratio would be among the lowest of any first round draft pick since 2008. That is not a death knell in itself, but the lack of current feel for the game shows up on defense as well.
The upside is obvious: Missi has an enormous catch radius with a 7’6’’ wingspan and a good, quick vertical. He has shown some willingness to put the ball on the floor once or twice and his stationary shooting form isn’t good but isn’t broken (35% midrange, 62% from the line). He blocks a ton of shots (7% block rate) and is tough to keep off the glass (14% offensive rebound rate) or off the line (60 free throw rate).
But early minutes in the NBA are tough to come by for unpolished bigs. He struggles in particular with applying consistent physical pressure against his opponent, whether setting hard screens or sitting in optimal box out position. While his defensive stance is strong his footwork is consistently a beat behind. At this point, he is much more reactive in where to move than proactive.
Missi may very well end up an NBA starter – that chance will keep him in my first round – but I worry about him getting lost in the shuffle with more room for improvement than an inpatient team would allow him to fulfill.
High Perspective
Cody Williams has some potentially damning flaws on offense. For someone pitched as a wing creator gamble, it’s troubling that he only made 5 off-the-dribble jumpers this past season on 16 attempts. He does clearly have decent shooting touch, slashing 41.5% from three, but his trigger is incredibly slow, evidenced by his weak 3.5 3PA/100. But where Cody excels offensively is at the rim, and for a 178 lbs. teenager, Williams is an incredible finisher. His blend of length and touch helped him to shoot 73.6% at the cup. This insane efficiency wasn’t aided much by transition either – Williams shot 70.7% on lay-up attempts in the half-court. And he’s doing this all with plenty of weight still to pack onto his frame.
The problem is that Williams lacks the ball control and strength to create rim attempts from a standstill. The solution is that it isn’t that difficult to manufacture drives for a player. Coming off zooms, staggers, and DHOs, Cody will be able to attack downhill with momentum and use his stride lengths to carve his way to deep paint touches. I don’t think it’d be outrageous to expect someone with his touch at the rim to develop into a capable spot shooter as well, even if it might take a few years for him to build the confidence.
But there’s much more to Williams’ upside than just his slashing ability – there’s a future NBA wing defender waiting to be molded. Yes, his 2.4% block rate and 1.3% steal rate are both horrendous. His footwork defending on the ball needs to improve and he has a tendency to lose track of his man away from the ball. But you cannot teach length, size, and movement skills. Cody is very nimble, and has some great flashes evading screens and using his length to muck up actions.
The argument in favor of Williams is a bet on youth and physicals. He’ll have to buy in, but the defensive ceiling is high. He’ll have to buy in, but he clearly has some level of touch to improve as a shooter. It’s not a sure thing, but the potential reward could be worth it.
Low Perspective
Cody Williams, the freshman forward for the University of Colorado, has a wide array of fans in the draft space with his alluring combination of size, touch, and feel. Playing 24 games this season while being hindered by various injuries, Williams has been a monster transition player, consistently being able to bring the ball up in space and attack the rim with his size and touch. For context, he’s shooting a scorching 71.1 TS% in transition and 71.4% on transition layups. Although the volume is low (21 attempts), a product of his role as a freshman on a competitive team, most of these transition layups are self-created with him bringing the ball up in grab-and-go situations.
The issue with Cody Williams is when space is drastically reduced in the halfcourt and his problem-solving as a scorer and creator tends to have more obstacles. Williams is quite fluid as a mover at 6’8”, however in the half-court, these movement skills are marginalized by a handle that is susceptible to stunts and digs due to his higher gather points. At the college level, this hasn’t been as problematic but when the handle is coupled with poor vertical pop and a lack of NBA strength at 190 pounds, it can make it quite difficult for Williams to carve space on these drives in the halfcourt at the next level. Colorado also runs some great double stagger sets and wide pin actions to get him downhill which have helped get him some easier baskets at the rim in the halfcourt. Skinnier wings and forwards can usually mitigate their frame issues early on by using their gravity as a shooter to create strong closeouts and open up the space to drive.
While Williams is shooting 41.5% from 3 and 33.3% on off-the-dribble midrange jump shots, the efficiency is a little misleading. He’s only taken 41 total 3s and 12 off-the-dribble midrange jumpers, and his efficiency from 3 is further boosted by his 17 open catch-and-shoot shots that he’s hitting at a 58.8% rate. Otherwise, he’s shooting 25% on off-the-dribble 3s and 30% on guarded catch-and-shoot. This is more in line with his much larger shooting sample between his senior year of HS and final appearance at EYBL, shooting 19.2% from 3 on 104 attempts between HS and AAU season last year. Williams may have touch but the lack of volume and versatility potentially means that teams may not respect him as a shooter early on in his NBA career.
The combination of his half-court driving flaws and lack of shooting volume leaves a major burden on his ability to score in transition, maintain advantages in the half-court, and provide real defensive impact. He often gets beat on drives but he does have some great tools defensively with great screen navigation at his size and length that allows him to deter shots at the rim off of guarding closeouts or the weak side of the rim. However, at the next level, Williams is going to struggle to guard strength matchups and more explosive creators early on which puts a true emphasis on how outlier his transition scoring has to be.
For his development, it would be in his best interest to land on a team that can take the slower route with his growth but that becomes a difficult question to calibrate for NBA teams based on how they project the value of his upside. The intersection of skills and tools is truly intriguing as a long-term strength creator when he puts on weight but his floor at the next level may be far lower than anticipated due to these holes in his game.
High Perspective
The argument in favor of Dalton Knecht is simple: he’s played unbelievable basketball in a high-level conference. Knecht has torn apart the SEC, averaging 21 points per game on 58.4% True Shooting while hitting 39.7% of his threes. Though I’d be shocked to see an NBA team allow Knecht to carry a 29.3% usage rate, there are skills he’s shown at Tennessee that should translate to the next level. Knecht’s shooting versatility is incredible, capable of firing threes off screens, turning post-ups into mid-range turnaround jumpers, and spotting up from well behind the three point line. And though his high hips and lack of craft and vertical pop will prevent him from being a dominant slasher, Knecht will be able to get to the rim attacking closeouts, having displayed impressive aggressiveness and physicality as a driver.
Knecht is often scrutinized for his lack of athleticism, particularly on the defensive end. He isn’t the most fluid mover, struggling to cover swaths of ground and lacking the flexibility to dodge screens. But I don’t think Knecht is going to be a devastating liability on D. His 6’9” wingspan assists him in contesting and blocking shots (2.7% block rate). Still, the idea here is that Knecht will be dangerous enough on offense to compensate for some of his defensive warts. His ability to put the ball in the hoop in a wide variety of ways cannot be overlooked.
Low Perspective
I love Dalton Knecht as a catch and shoot player, 77 for 182 (42%) from three on those attempts this past season with Tennessee. But he lacks versatility in his game that would make him a more scarce player type. Catch and shoot shotmakers is the skillset with the lowest barriers to entry. Of all the traits, distance shooting is least impacted by height, and there is no dribbling involved to add a layer of complication. It’s one or two motions, though height is of course a benefit.
That is why I am lower on catch and shoot players as draft values, but I am also lower on Dalton Knecht specifically. Knecht has poor peripheral vision, getting locked in to only what’s in front of him on offense and occasionally lose his man on defense. This is why he only had a 13% assist rate compared to 30% usage as well as mere 1.3% steal rate on defense.
Ultimately, Knecht’s primary skillset is highly replaceable and lacks consistent counters (beyond his poor passing, Knecht was a below average off the dribble scorer). His age leaves little room for upside in these weak areas. There are plenty better risk reward options in the first round, though some team surely will talk themselves into the safe option in Knecht. He will be an NBA player, but likely not a very good one.
High Perspective
Kel’el Ware’s highest points rank among the best in the entire class. He already demonstrates a decent shooting volume (17/40 3pa, 42.5%) while collecting 63 dunks in his sophomore season for Indiana, which underlines both his shooting and athletic ability. This is a baseline that even today’s stretch bigs like Myles Turner didn’t achieve in college. It’s easy to believe in Ware’s mix of well above average athleticism and shooting ability. He didn’t turn the ball over very often while being able to show some passes against early double teams and sometimes even putting the ball on the floor. His huge 7’5’’ wingspan and well above average vertical pop make him a great lob target too. Where opinions really differ is when it comes to Ware’s overall level of feel. When locked in, Ware is as good of a rim protector as any player in the class, which gives him a fairly decent floor to earn early playing time and develop in the feel-department.
Low Perspective
Kel’el Ware is someone who is an objectively very talented basketball player. He’s a true 7-footer with long arms, moves very well for someone his size, and has scoring touch from all over the court. While it’s certainly understandable to see the hype Kel’el gets as a prospect, I think he lacks in too many areas that are vital for NBA big man play to fully buy in on the upside.
The biggest issue I have in particular with Kel’el is his inconsistency defensively. He definitely has high level flashes in the moments where he’s fully locked and the tools can be overwhelming, but there are too many possessions in his film where he’s not in the right position to effect plays at the rim, whether it’s from not reading the floor quick enough or a lack of high end motor. This shows up a bit in the numbers too, where his block rate of 6.5% this season was overall fine for a Center prospect, but pretty underwhelming for someone with his rare blend of length and athleticism. He also has a skinny frame and may struggle to ever match up physically with some of the stronger bigs in the league.
Ultimately as talented as he is, a lot of the stuff Kel’el does well is sort of “bonus” stuff for an NBA Center. In terms of a lot of the core things teams look for in their bigs – screening, physicality, consistently playing hard, being in the right position defensively – there are too many holes for me to feel comfortable using a high pick on him.
High Perspective
DaRon Holmes II is a quintessential toolsy big, operating primarily as a post scorer but with versatility across the court. He rebounds (23% of opponent misses), passes (assisting 19% of teammate makes) and defends (7% block rate, 2% steal rate). But most of all he is a high feel player who, at 6’10’’, knows how to use that skill in various ways.
Holmes is also dynamic providing rim pressure: his 71 dunks was fifth in the NCAA. He finished 74% of his 189 rim attempts. Despite his stature he is nimble turning off a screen to re-set footwork to finish lobs or catch in the short roll.
He scores from the perimeter, too. Holmes extended his game away from the basket by shooting 39% on 83 threes, as well as 35% on 127 midrange attempts. Between that and his 71% shooting from the line, Holmes can be seen as a low end threat from distance but effective for a big.
There may be questions around Holmes’ positionality, but that is putting the cart ahead of the horse. He is as physical as a 5 while as mobile laterally as a 4. He needs some work hedging and recovering in a way that limits his utility as a lone rim protector, but is highly likely to provide some value in that role regardless.
Most important is his ability to conduct offense. If anything, Holmes’ 31% usage understates his importance to Dayton’s offense. He often initiated out of Delay actions, going through his rotations as the team’s quarterback. You can trust DaRon to make countless decisions for your team.
Holmes is a lot physically, as he took a free throw nearly for every field goal. His smart physicality is NBA-ready, alternating between banging in the post and making stellar reads on the perimeter. If his outside shot continues to grow, he has real starter upside. With all of his tools, I have a high degree of confidence in him adding value on an NBA floor.
Low Perspective
When talking about DaRon Holmes, his college production has to be acknowledged. DaRon functioned as one of the more dominant interior scorers in recent memory at the college level, and put up incredible numbers as a junior: 20/8.5/2.5 on 54/39/71 splits. He basically did everything for Dayton as their go-to scorer, best defender, and even one of their better passers. As good as he is though, there are some questions regarding translation to the NBA level.
My main gripe with DaRon is that he just doesn’t have the size to be a full time Center in the NBA. It’s easy to get caught up in different things when evaluating bigs, but having the requisite size/length to play the position will always be arguably the #1 most important thing. At 6’10 in shoes with a 7’1 wingspan, DaRon is a good bit undersized in both height and length relative to a majority of starting centers in the NBA, and doesn’t have outlier strength or vertical athleticism to offset this in a way someone like Bam Adebayo does. It is true that he has real perimeter skill for a big and might be able to play some minutes at the 4 to offset this, but the skill threshold at that position is significantly higher. While DaRon has a great first step and is a good shooter for a 5-man, those skills become a lot less valuable/rare when compared to other 4’s.
At the end of the day I can see why others are high on DaRon, but I struggle to see his game translating cleanly. He’s at his best playing the 5 on offense with measurements much closer to an NBA 4, making him someone really context dependent at the next level due to the difficulty of maximizing a player like that in lineups.
High Perspective
Mogbo is a 22 year old who hasn’t taken a single three in two years of college. Not ideal in the modern NBA, but perhaps he’s a menacing rim protector? Well, not exactly: Mogbo is 6’6 and put up a paltry 4% block rate over the last two seasons. Making matters worse, this production all comes in on a USF team playing in a mid-major conference.
Why would anyone take an undersized, non-shooting secondary rim protector?
Let’s start with his interior dominance. Coincidentally, Mogbo is entering the draft at the same time as Zach Edey, who happens to have one of the best rim scoring profiles of any college prospect in NCAA history. But in virtually any other draft, Mogbo’s interior dominance would be unrivaled. The numbers are ridiculously good: Mogbo is one of the best rebounders in the country, with a monster 14.3% offensive rebounding rate and an equally impressive 30% defensive rebounding rate. This is a resounding example of Mogbo’s functional athletic ability; despite his lack of size, Mogbo multiples his length and verticality with an unwavering motor. Mogbo has a 7’2 WS and a 9 foot standing reach, good for a whopping +8 wingspan.
Mogbo is also a ridiculously good scorer inside, converting on 86 dunks this season. He shot an impressive 71% on 232 attempts at the rim, while shooting 63% on 2s overall. These are all strong numbers that rank at the top of all centers eligible for this draft, but it’s the ways in which he wins that is so compelling. San Francisco gets out in transition less than your average team, and they lack effective isolation scorers or guards who can really score out of the PnR. As such, Mogbo had a notable creation burden. He self-created a ton of twos, especially out of drives. He had some flashes of pullup 2s, and was really able to create for himself using a rudimentary but decisive handle to get to the rim. Perhaps more importantly, he was just great at traditional big man things: very efficient on postups (a testament to his strength), and a very sound cutter.
The shot isn’t quite there, but Mogbo has quite good touch. His floater is inconsistent, but he’s able to really score in the short intermediate area. The FT numbers are around 70% for two seasons. It’s also important to note that Mogbo had a late growth spurt, forcing him to transition from a guard role to more of a post role. He was taking threes in JUCO games as recently as two years ago, so shot development does seem more feasible than in most cases for a “non-shooter”.
Here’s where things get interesting: by virtue of his youth experience as a guard, Mogbo is a legitimately good passer. He’s not just a good passer relative to centers, he’s a great passer period. He has some real zip on his passes, whether its finding cutters at the top of the key or playing off the short roll. His 24.3% assist rate was in line with many point guards, with a remarkable 2.0 A:TO. These kinds of passing numbers for a forward-sized player are quite rare.
In fact, these are drafted prospects in the last decade with WS > 7ft and assist rate > 20%: Kyle Anderson, Scottie Barnes, Shake Milton, Trayce Jackson-Davis, Draymond green, Jalen williams, Greg Monroe, Dalen Terry, Herbert Jones, Wendell Moore, Nikola Jovic, Sandro Mamukelashvili, Jalen Johnson, and Dwight Powell. Historically, it’s a good bet to bet on athleticism and feel. When one of the best athletes in the class also happens to be one of its best passers, I think it’s a gamble worth making.
Low Perspective
The obvious place to start when talking about Jonathan Mogbo’s weaknesses is his play against higher competition. At San Francisco, 26 of his 33 games were against teams outside of the top 50, and 22 were against teams outside of the top 100. When Mogbo played against these higher competition teams, his Box Plus-Minus dropped from a dominant 10.5 to a strong 7.8 versus top 100 teams to then a just good 5.8 versus top 50. Is this trend something that would continue against NBA comp?
I believe we truly cannot say, which is part of the appeal for Mogbo as much as the risk. San Francisco’s roster was not particularly built to handle higher competition, depending on Mogbo to run the offense and create havoc on defense. But neither of the two worked for stretches of these higher competition games. In particular, Mogbo struggled to create his own scoring from a standstill and also struggled with quicker defensive rotations.
The scoring is a fair point. Mogbo is fairly teammate-dependent to get him easy scoring opportunities, not indifferent from almost all in the class. But for an upperclassman getting top 40 chatter, it is a concern. His handle is good for a big and decent for a forward but still mostly simplistic, maxing out at a crossover or single hesitation, neither convincing he will be able to create space in the pros. The outside shot is a big question mark to help alleviate these concerns, with zero made threes but a perhaps workable 70% from the line.
The defensive rotations point is fair as well. For someone of his age at 22, you would hope those details would be completely ironed out. He was prone to fouling against higher comp, biting on pump fakes and occasionally late providing rim help. Perhaps some of this can be attributed to his recency playing as a big, but this pretty much removes the odds of him being an NBA level rim protector, or over a consistent help one. He has other defensive skills – most notably poking the ball loose for steals with his 7’2’’ wingspan – but he is certainly not an all-around player.
Ultimately, I view these uncertainties as a chance for upside, easier from my position as armchair GM, but there is an inherent risk as well.
High Perspective
A 2-guard out of McKinney, TX, Ja’Kobe Walter is known best for his shotmaking and overall scoring ability. While he did shoot just 34% from 3pt this year, almost every other indicator points to him being much better than that. He had both a high FT% (79%), and high 3pt volume (11.6 3PA per 100 possessions), which are 2 of the most important stats for shooting translation, in addition to a high level shooting track record in High School. Visually, Ja’Kobe has a very fundamentally sound jumper with incredible shot prep, which allows him to be comfortable getting his shot off in a variety of situations (pull-ups, C&S, off-screen/movement, etc). In terms of pure shotmaking talent, Walter is on the short list for best in the class.
The real question for Walter long term is how well he can round out the non-shooting aspects of his game, and there are some positive signs. He has real foul drawing craft evidenced by a .478 FTr, which gives him an avenue to scoring even when his shot isn’t falling. And while his defense at Baylor wasn’t good overall, he boasts high end positional length (6’10 WS) which gives him room to keep improving on that end long term. Ja’Kobe will also need to add on a little more strength to his frame, although that’s pretty standard for a lot of teenagers. If he’s able to keep rounding out areas of his game like on-ball defense and inside the arc scoring long term, that combined with the high level shotmaking upside gives him the potential to be a consistent 15+ PPG scorer at the NBA level.
Low Perspective
Ja’Kobe Walter is likely a better scorer than his percentages: I’ll give him that. It’s everywhere else that has me concerned.
In particular, Walter might have the worst defensive instincts in the class. He consistently takes a moment or more to locate his man and lacks the recovery tools to make a play. This was a major issue at Baylor, and therefore will be likely unplayable early in his NBA career as speed increases significantly.
The other major issue is the passing. He averaged only 1.4 assist per game despite his healthy number of touches. Though, to be fair, neither did he hardly ever turn the ball over. But Walter generally has tunnel-vision when creating his shot, with his struggles to create space making the passing windows much smaller.
I expect the outside shooting efficiency to improve, as Walter just needs a bit more consistency in what is a generally smooth looking shooting form. But the finishing may remain a struggle, only at 54% at Baylor on a limited number of attempts. Walter’s aforementioned struggle to create separation made the attempts difficult, again something that will persist with better NBA athletes.
Walter’s poor athleticism in general shows up in many counting stats. His rebounds, steals, blocks and dunks (only 4) are all disappointing for someone with a 6’10’’ wingspan.
Walter will likely eventually carve out a small NBA role through his shotmaking. But his limited athleticism will make attempts consistently difficult and Walter lacks the skill to find other ways to contribute.
High Perspective
I learned a very useful heuristic my first year doing real draft analysis in 2021: never count out the wing-sized athletes who can really pass.
I was far too low on Scottie and Jalen Johnson that year. In 2022, I thought I learned my lesson and then got burned by Jalen Williams, and to a lesser degree Vince Williams Jr. I was ready for Trayce Jackson Davis and Amen Thompson in the 2023 draft, but let Lively (the A:TO god) drop a few too many spots for my liking.
This isn’t a piece to embellish on my draft misses. And yes, this heuristic is reductive: many wing sized players who can dribble and dunk have not been particularly successful in the NBA. But generally, strong, wing-sized athletes who can make good decisions with the ball can get somewhat underrated. We (Avinash) can get bogged down in the details and ignore their general goodness, and then severely underrate how impeccable of a fit they are in this modern NBA.
It makes sense, to some extent. In this pace and space era, rapid decision making has superseded its status as a luxury to become an ever important requisite. And of course, the league is built around opportunizing space, as well as providing strong offensive value without mitigating value on defense. The “athletic wing with strong passing goodness” fits at so many of these intersections, and the utility of the archetype is quite intuitive.
This is where Tyson comes in. Let’s quickly go over Tyson’s weaknesses, of which there are many. He’s not a great finisher: only 48% on layups in the halfcourt, albeit on monstrous volume (66/140). He’s not a particularly great defender: just not a great processor on that end and often seems to lack awareness, as highlighted by middling steal rates for his career. Offensively, he carries a high usage but doesn’t lead a productive offense: 107 offensive rating on 30% usage is pretty low, as is 6 BPM and 4.6 RAPM for a guy turning 22 at the beginning of the NBA season. But what’s especially concerning to me is the minimal on/off swing. If Cal is such a bad basketball context, how is there a minimal difference in net rating with Tyson on and off the floor? Shouldn’t he be able to at least provide positive value for a bad high major team?
These are great concerns that I hold. But somehow, just somehow, I’m a bit bullish on Tyson’s upside, especially given how weak of a draft this is.
Let’s try to approximate some apt comparisons for Tyson, based on his strengths. Tyson’s sell is his athleticism (5.2% oreb), his size (6’7), his passing (23.5% assist), his decision making (1.1 A:TO, 2% steal), and pullup shooting upside (7.5 3s/100, 36% 3P, 80% FT). Let’s run an ethical query by generously adjusting these minimum thresholds: 4% oreb, 6’6+, 20% assist, 1.5% steal, and 5 3s/100 on 32% 3P with 70% FT. Seem reasonable enough?
Two things stand out: first, Tyson’s dunking ability is legit. This is evident on film immediately: unlike most prospects, the majority of his dunks (18 of 24) were in the halfcourt. Tyson excels at probing and attacking gaps, with his strong frame and burst enabling him to drive and dunk in traffic. The dunking ability is only behind Jordan Usher (worst producer on list by far) and Mamu (low non rim 2 frequency and mediocre shooting indicators).
Second, Tyson is an approximate doppelganger of Tres Tinkle and Khris Middleton. Tres is an interesting case, as he was 2.5 years older than Tyson in his junior year; he also played for his father, which kinda explains his high usage/lower rate of success anecdotally. Khris isn’t a perfect fit either, as he was 9 months younger than Tyson and better offensive rebounder with about 2 inches bigger wingspan.
What was the purpose of this statistical analysis? It’s not to say that Jaylon is the next Khris Middleton. Rather, there are some unique traits of Tyson that give him upside valves to be an All-Star type talent. Of any wing eligible for the draft this year, Tyson had the lowest assisted rates on all three levels: in every sense of the term, Jaylon Tyson is a 3-level scorer. It’s hard to query for assisted rates, but the wing-sized player with similarly low rates of assisted shotmaking and high volume that kept popping up was Jalen Williams. There’s just not a lot of players who are powerful finishers and high volume pullup shooters, all while functioning as adept pick and roll handlers.
Tyson has a very good handle, he can get to his spots, he’s a solid decision maker, and he can really get up there. The impact metrics aren’t quite there, but this is just the sort of archetype that often lacks in collegiate productivity. His floor is a Chandler Hutchinson type, someone who struggles to finish against NBA length and isn’t good enough to defend. I will not deny the strong bust probability is with Tyson.
And yet, I’m intrigued by his upside. There is a legitimate blueprint for stardom by virtue of Tyson’s well-distributed production quality. Again, this isn’t the sort of player I’m used to taking bets on, especially given the poor impact metrics relative to age. But impact-metrics aren’t foolproof, and the guy who can dunk, handle, and pass is probably the most likely to prove them wrong.
Low Perspective
Jaylon Tyson is an excellent shotmaker, who dances through footwork with precise movements. But I believe this aesthetically dazzling style of play may be biasing him upwards on boards.
You can measure a player’s applied physicality in two ways: their defensive output, gauged by Defensive Box Plus-Minus, and their free throw rate. Jaylon Tyson scores poorly in both. It’s a historically difficult path for prospects with only Jamal Murray and Zach Lavine overcoming scoring as poorly on those two stats as Tyson in their draft year.
You can see the impact on the tape, if you have settled from the euphoria of his shotmaking. Tyson has a good first step and explosion to dunk but everything else is mediocre, athletically. He can be a bit heavy footed but also a step behind as not elite in feel for the game.
The mediocre feel shows up in his passing, too. While capable of some high-value reads, Tyson struggled with the more mundane, prone to flat-out missing his man. In general, Tyson is more reactive to the situation than setting the tone proactively.
He knows how to score on decent efficiency, with 36% shooting on 139 threes, 40% shooting on 128 midrange attempts, 58% shooting on 210 rim attempts and 80% shooting on 142 free throw attempts. His self-creation share is among the highest in the class. There’s a very obvious way I could be wrong in having him around 30 in a weak class, but more than enough ways I could be right given the rough patches in his game.
And ultimately, the efficiency is not otherwordly enough to putting the ball in the hands of someone who makes questionable passes. Neither has had had much catch and shoot volume this season, the majority of his looks coming out of PNR. If the efficiency climbs I may end up wrong, but right now I struggle to justify the on ball play finishing usage that would warrant an early draft pick.
High Perspective
Carlton ‘Bub’ Carrington should be a case study on how often the forest is missed for the trees when discussing young prospects. A 4-star recruit in high school and someone who will still be 18 on draft night, Carrington has been tasked with a major offensive load as the table setter for the Pittsburgh Panthers.
First, let’s get his issues out of the way. He’s a poor defender who gets lost in advanced offensive actions, often getting beat on and off the ball. He’s also a negligible event creator with only a 0.9 block percentage and a 1.0 steal percentage. A function of being younger and still needing to put weight on his frame, he also struggles to get deeper into the restricted area and finish at the rim consistently. Carrington has a solid first step, but his straight-line burst is not consistently creating driving advantages in ACC competition which shows up in his limited attempts at the rim and 24.1 free-throw-rate.
So what makes Carlton Carrington a high-level guard bet in the 2024 draft class? Even with these issues faltering his game, Carrington has a special offensive game that is rooted in his convergence of playmaking, shooting touch, and size as a guard. Standing at around 6’ 5”, he is consistently able to create offense for a college team that is 27th in adjusted offensive efficiency. In fact, according to Carrington’s offensive Bayesian player rating (OPBR), Pitt’s offense operates 2.92 points per 100 possessions better when he is on the court.
How is he doing this? Carrington is an elite shooter, both from midrange and the perimeter. His efficiency from the midrange is staggering at 50% on a shot diet of 89.6% unassisted shots. The 3-point efficiency may not be eye-widening at 32.2% but he is shooting this at a 55.4% unassisted rate. The threat of Carrington’s pull-up shot opens up driving lanes and he’s advanced navigating out of pick-and-roll to hunt his midrange shot or find an open advantage as a passer. Very few freshmen have matched Carrington’s ability to shoot exceptionally well and run an offense effectively with low turnovers. Just four other freshmen – Malik Monk, D’Angelo Russell, Brandon Knight, and Jabari Smith – have recorded over 60 successful far 2 attempts, an assist-to-turnover ratio above 1, more than one dunk and shot over 10 three-point attempts per 100 possessions, all while sustaining a positive box plus-minus.
For someone as young as Carrington, there may be further creation pathways as a table-setting guard with shooting gravity at the next level with low-hanging athletic development such as strength gains and improvements in his straight-line burst. Given all of these factors and in a class with limited freshmen creation bets, it would be a smart move for teams to use a first-round pick on the promising young shooting talent.
Low Perspective
I understand much of the Bub Carrington buzz. He’s one of the youngest players in this class and a legitimate pull-up shot-maker. Shooting 50.9% on 116 pull-up 2 attempts is not an easy feat for an 18 year old playing in the ACC. Carrington is a patient ball-handler whose movement skills on offense already pop. He changes pace and directions well to manipulate his defender while coming off screens and hand-offs, allowing him to snake his way to his spots in the mid-range for pull-ups. I’ve additionally been impressed with his right-handed live-dribble passing and his ability to generally read the floor in PnR situations.
That being said, I don’t think that Carrington showed enough this season to be considered a first round pick. Many of his issues on both ends stem from his severe lack of strength. With a weak lower body, he struggles to generate leverage and frequently loses balance in the paint. Carrington shot just 53.8% at the rim this year, but in 11 games against top 50-ranked opponents, that mark plummets to 30.4% (7/23). Given these woes, he’ll have to be a knockdown shooter at the next level to return offensive value – something we can’t guarantee from someone who shot 32.0% on catch-and-shoot threes. Carrington’s defense is also worrisome, as he frequently gets bounced out of plays at the point-of-attack. His 1.0% and 0.9% steal and block rates are indications for his lack of athletic pop on that end.
I would have liked to see Carrington go back to college for another year. I love gambling on youth and off-the-dribble juice, but there are just too many question marks at this stage in his development.
High Perspective
Isaiah Crawford might prove the doubters wrong quickly into his career, one of the most NBA-ready prospects available in the draft. His versatility and ability to create havoc as a defender give him a floor, but he has upside beyond that from his on-ball creation.
Crawford is an almost ideal NBA help defender. He has stellar instincts for when to commit and the wingspan (7’0.5’’) to take advantage when he does. With a 3.5% steal rate and 5.7% block rate, no other NCAA player exceeded both marks.
Beyond that, no elite stockmaker exceeded his usage, assist rate or midrange game. The latter has been a major growth area for Zay in particular, self-creating 88 midrange makes the past two seasons compared to a total of 31 the two seasons prior. This has given him a reliable counter to his outside shooting, where he has shot a career 40% on 287 three point attempts.
Crawford, simply, has very few holes in his game. His passing in particular I expect to look even better at the NBA level. Often tasked with creating from a standstill for Louisiana Tech, Crawford’s passing shines instead when the defense is already in a scramble.
The big question mark around Crawford is his competition level, and, alongside that, the degree of his athleticism. His team only played three top 50 opponents, and Crawford’s Box Plus-Minus cratered from 8.4 to 1.8 against them. But I want Crawford in a lower usage complementary role anyways, and he could excel in it to the tune of starter upside.
Low Perspective
Isaiah Crawford has established himself as a popular “sleeper” prospect in the 2024 draft class. It’s easy to see why given that he’s one of the most NBA ready defenders in the class, possessing a 7’0.5” wingspan with high level feel/instincts as a help defender. His production on the defensive side matched that eye test as well, as he averaged a ridiculous 3.8 stocks (steals + blocks) a game this year.
With all this being said, there’s good reason to be concerned about the other end of the court. 5th year seniors are expected to be dominant in order to be viable draft prospects, and Crawford’s numbers of 29.4 PTS per 100 possessions with a negative AST/TO ratio playing in the Conference USA are pretty unimpressive. While he has shot it well from 3pt the last 2 years from a percentage standpoint, the lack of volume is troublesome for a wing as well. He took just 5.6 3PA/100 possessions this year, which is closely aligned to his career average of 5.8. This is concerning because historically volume is just as important (arguably more so) for 3pt projection than the actual percentage, and Crawford’s volume numbers are below average for a perimeter player. Overall Isaiah has some appeal as a prospect due to what he brings as a defender, but he’s a longshot to ever be a solid contributor on the offensive side.
High Perspective
I think that the well-roundedness of KJ Simpson’s game will surprise a lot of people at the next level. At first glance, Simpson seems like a classic multi-year guard prospect, an undersized, high-usage old guy that wins with high-level burst. Someone whose size, defense, and career shooting splits are likely to hold him back at the next level. However, the tape shows a player with much more to his game. Not only did Simpson thrive in a large offensive role, leading a team featuring multiple other first round prospects in usage, but he also showed some skills that’ll allow him to thrive in a more complimentary role.
Simpson’s off-ball game is phenomenal. He moves well without the ball in his hands and does an excellent job relocating along the perimeter. Simpson also shot 42.6% on 115 catch-and-shoot three attempts this year. Even though his splits were far worse in his previous two seasons (sub-30’s from three as a Fr./So.), it’s hard not to buy the shot given his mid-range and free-throw proficiency. Defensively, he makes rotations that normal high-usage 22-year olds don’t make. He does a good job keeping the shape of the defense and providing help gap help.
That’s all not to say that Simpson lacks creation equity at the next level. He made 112 shots at the rim this year, winning with a deceive first-step and some change-of-pace ability. Simpson also canned 41.7% of his off-the-dribble threes, further highlighting his improved versatility as a shooter. His live-dribble passing touch is impressive as well, throwing accurate interior reads out of PnR and playing at an under-control pace.
Low Perspective
I love KJ Simpson, a first rounder on my board. But I have to admit there are several risk factors pointing to potential downside risk.
First, and likely most obviously, is the size. At 6’0.25’’ without shoes, Simpson has physical comps of Isaiah Cannon, Devon Dotson and Frank Mason Jr. Not exactly inspiring of physical dominance. Nevertheless, there are still some success stories among first round picks his height or shorter who had as few offensive rebounds and blocks as Simpson did. But you better either have strong athletic gifts to compensate or else nuclear shooting.
The jury is still out on whether Simpson can be a nuclear shooter or not. Simpson’s shooting has improved every year, with a drastic leap in his third, most recent NCAA season. But he’s still just a 35% three point shooter over his full college sample, 83% from the line. Pretty good figures but far from elite. Which is closer to his actual shooting talent – his career or his most recent season? We’ll find out.
It is also an open question how good of an athlete Simpson is relative to NBA talent. He was able to dominate in college by popping up and applying strength at the opportune moment, but will be at far more physical disadvantages at the NBA level. Can he still win with strength? Simpson is fairly vertical dependent (clocking in with one of the best max verticals in the Combine) on his drives, where he still shot only 55% at the rim. Will that number drop concerningly low against better rim protectors?
I lean on the optimistic side for these questions, but the uncertainty is real.
High Perspective
Even as someone higher on Ryan Dunn than consensus, I will admit that I have struggled in gauging where he ought to be picked. He brings little to the table on the offensive end, even at the college level. He’s a putrid spot-up threat that shot just 20.6% (7/34) on catch-and-shoot threes and hit only 53.2% of his free throws. He carries essentially zero creation load in the half-court and only has a 6.1% assist rate. He is a smart cutter with a strong frame and plenty of vertical pop, but that will not be enough to provide positive offensive value without significant dribbling, passing, or shooting developments.
So why do I still see Dunn as a serious NBA prospect? He might just be that good on defense to make it worth it. He covers ground effortlessly, soaring in for weakside rim-rotations and absorbing slashers with his length. Very few non full-time Centers have matched his 10.6% and 3.0% block and steal rates. He was created in a lab to slot in as a defensive 4, capable of making long rotations on the backline, plugging driving lanes, and wreaking havoc with his length and hand activity. His motor is also exceptional, active on the glass and constantly diving for loose balls.
Dunn might be too large a liability on offense to see real NBA minutes, but it’s hard to let someone with genuine All-Defense upside slide outside of the first round.
Low Perspective
The 6’8 sophomore forward has been a defensive revelation for the Virginia Cavaliers this past season, terrorizing the ACC with his event creation. Dunn is extremely effective at creating havoc on the defensive end through steals, blocks, and deflections. Even when he’s not roaming and guarding drives he’s allowed only 25% of these field goals through, a truly versatile defender, but where he will shine is as the prototypical defensive NBA forward.
Only 3 high major players have banked a season with a block percentage above 10 and a steal percentage above 3: Nerlens Noel, Willie Cauley-Stein, and Ryan Dunn. Roaming off of the other team’s worst spacer, Dunn can continue to create havoc to a high degree in the NBA with his ground coverage and hustle, so why do I not believe in betting on Dunn in the first round?
The unfortunate reality at the NBA level is that players extremely slanted to the defensive end need to provide at least a couple of skills on the offensive end, and Dunn provides very little on the offensive end even at the college level. Dunn is stuck in no man’s land with his offensive role due to his touch and general ability to score.
He’s shot a problematic 52.5% from the line and shown some solid touch from non-rim 2 attempts at 39.6% over his 2 years at Virginia. The problem is even with that efficiency, he barely shoots the ball, only shooting 52 non-rim 2 attempts and 51 3’s over 65 games. When there is a lack of volume and an efficiency of 23.5% from 3 throughout his college career, there’s little incentive for NBA defenses to stay attached to him, thus enabling opposing teams to sag off of him. Dunn also lacks an effective handle in the half-court, consistently struggling to get past stunts and digs. This makes it more difficult to envision him scaling down to positions that require more ball skills on offense.
On the flip side, he’s undersized to be an NBA-caliber 5 and does not provide the level of interior pressure required to be an undersized center. Dunn’s defensive profile compares to some rangy defensive NBA centers like Noel and Cauley-Stein but both of these players were much larger and could draw more gravity to the rim even in college. Although Dunn possesses explosion as an athlete, reaching the caliber of an NBA 5 demands a significant level of interior pressure. For comparison, Noel recorded 28 half-court dunks and a free throw rate (FTR) of 62.7, Cauley-Stein had 22 half-court dunks and a 46.6 FTR, while Dunn managed 19 half-court dunks with a 37.0 FTR. While those stats compare closer to Cauley-Stein, Dunn at 6’8 is not the same level of vertical threat that Cauley-Stein was.
It presents a challenging scenario for an NBA team to utilize Dunn effectively on the offensive end, whether as a roller or in a role requiring greater ball skills, despite what he brings defensively. For someone who will be 21.45 years old on draft night, it’s difficult to imagine significant improvement in his shooting touch. However, in a context with more than ample spacing and creation where it would be less problematic, Dunn could play spot minutes out of the dunker spot and DHOs, enabling his ability to create havoc on defense to forge a niche.
High Perspective
Kevin McCullar has been on the fringes of the draft radar for several years now; mainly because he’s always been a clear NBA caliber defender, but has never shown enough offensively to be more than a borderline prospect. This season however, McCullar took a substantial leap offensively and in turn has become a much more interesting draft prospect.
McCullar has always had impressive size and strength for a wing, and this season he upped his aggressiveness as a driver which frequently led to layups or trips to the free throw line against overmatched college defenders. He also made improvements as a shooter, setting career highs in both 3pt percentage and volume at 33% on 7.5 3PA per 100 possessions. While the 3pt% is still lower than you’d like, it’s worth noting how over-extended he was offensively. Kansas’s lack of scoring from the guard position led to McCullar taking a lot of forced jumpers off the dribble out of necessity, and his efficiency on those shots (28% on 61 attempts) dragged down his overall percentages a lot. His catch & shoot numbers (38% overall, 44% on open attempts) are much more promising and are probably more applicable to his NBA role. The jumper is definitely still a bit of a question mark along with how his strength based creation translates against better athletes, but at the end of the day it’s hard to be too harsh on his scoring ability after leading a conference as good as the Big-12 in PPG.
Defensively, McCullar’s impact did slip a bit this season while battling injury and being thrust into a high usage role offensively. With those factors in mind I’m comfortable basing his defensive projection more off the previous 2 years in which his film is up there with the best defensive wings in this class. McCullar isn’t an elite athlete which will likely hold him back from ever being an All-Defense caliber defender, but the combination of size, strength, feel, and versatility still project him as a clear + on that end of the floor.
Overall McCullar certainly isn’t the most exciting or highest upside prospect, but you know what you’re getting from him. The improved scoring ability combined with positional size, passing, and high defensive floor make him a good bet to be a rotational wing that helps you win games for years to come.
Low Perspective
McCullar Jr. was a damn good player for Kansas. He’s a good defensive prospect who understands how to make things happen on that end, and he’s always seemingly in the right spots as an off-ball defender. His size of six-foot-seven inches allows him to be flexible when mixing up lineups to switch. Offensively, he was over-taxed in his duties in Kansas, especially as an on-ball creator. I don’t think he’s someone at the next level to whom you can give the ball and ask him to create offense. When you see him doing things as a tertiary player, good things happen for McCullar Jr. I think there are too many concerns, especially for a 23-year-old prospect, not to be worried about him. Can he win with strength creation at the next level? Is the shot real? It’s something we will all have to wait and see about. But he could thrive in a Bruce Brown-esque role at the NBA level.
High Perspective
Standing slightly taller than 6’4 with a 6’6 wingspan, Ajay Mitchell on the surface seems to be an easy prospect to pass over. Having shot (insert 3P% numbers), Mitchell is a combo guard with questionable shooting ability who has been best with the ball in his hands, despite almost certainly needing to play a good deal off the ball wherever he lands. However Mitchell’s evaluation becomes much rosier when you recognize how difficult the context he played within this past season at UC Santa Barbara. UCSB was 323rd in the country in three-point rate and the lack of shooting talent surrounding Mitchell, in tandem with a heavily structured Princeton offense, rarely provided Mitchell opportunities to operate off an advantage in the halfcourt. Despite the playing environment not being conducive to Mitchell’s downhill playing style, he managed impressive efficiency, posting a 60% True Shooting with only 9.2% of his shots being assisted. Mitchell was also one of the highest frequency AND efficient Pick-and-Roll operators in the country, finishing the season in the 91st percentile for PNR efficiency while ranking in the 97th percentile in PNR volume.
All of these attributes in Mitchell’s favor still leave the question of his viability as a spacer. While Mitchell only shot 194 threes over three years at UCSB, connecting on a mediocre 32%, there’s much reason for optimism when the remaining touch indicators are taken into consideration. Mitchell shot 53.5% on runners with a robust volume of 142 attempts, and a similarly impressive 41.7% on 195 pull-up two-point jumpers. Even on catch-and-shoot 3’s this past seasons Mitchell shot 44.8%. When taking a holistic approach to Mitchell’s shooting profile there are a lot of encouraging signs, combined with the understanding of his proficiency as a PNR operator and advantage creator (47.8% Free-throw rate) Mitchell profiles as a high level complimentary guard. Defensively Mitchell hasn’t been a prolific event creator historically, however on a possession-by-possession basis I was quite impressed with his point-of-attack defense especially navigating screens. Mitchell’s highly flexible through his hips and has a strong frame for his position. He was frequently deployed as a backline defender, but instances where Mitchell was deployed at the point-of-attack he acquitted himself well, and this was a skill which carried over to his performance at the NBA Combine scrimmages. Mitchell’s strength and positive positional size should also allow him to guard smaller wings along with perimeter players.
All in all, in a class populated with plenty of older backup guards, Mitchell is one of the most impressive on tape and statistically, despite playing in perhaps the most difficult situation of the crop.
Low Perspective
Ajay Mitchell has undeniable craft. He’s a 6’5 point guard and perhaps the best pure pick and roll handler this side of Jamal Shead. These strong foul drawing type PGs with outstanding touch should be strong picks. His passing and touch are undeniable. However, it’s the rest of his profile that concerns me.
Fundamentally, I’m very skeptical of players from low major conferences. Sure, some of the NBA’s biggest stars were from low major conferences: Damian Lillard, CJ McCollum, Ja Morant, Steph Curry. But these are also 4 of the most productive players of the last decade by far. They were immediately obvious with generational profiles as early as their freshman/sophomore years, dominating against the competition. What’s really important, however, is that they were dominant athletically as well. You probably don’t think of these guys as uber athletes, but it’s all relative to competition: they had strong dunk totals, strong rebounding numbers, and gaudy steal rates. Ajay, however, is lacking in all these facets.
I see a lot of comps for Ajay to guys like Austin Reaves or Malcolm Brogdon, but I think this understates just how bad his conference is. Ajay was slightly less productive than these players, but this residual needs to be understood in context of the Big West Conference. Since 2000, there have been three TOTAL Big West players drafted: James Ennis, Orlando Johnson, and Pape Sow. People underestimate how terrible this conference is, and the fact of the matter is that Ajay was not dominating this low major conference as strongly as legitimate draft prospects would.
Ajay wins with complexity: he’s not particularly bursty or explosive (as confirmed by poor offensive rebounding numbers and below average vertical testing). He does draw fouls well, and he gets to the rim with volume. But watching Ajay, he is relying on complex counters and fakes to get to the rim and score. To me, Ajay is far too craft reliant against athletically deficient opposition: he is not winning with convincing enough margins at the low major level. He pushes and ponders, playing with strong pace and looking for gaps to exploit. 60% at the rim for two straight seasons is in line with the aforementioned Brogdon and Reaves, but it’s far less impressive considering the far worse competition. 3 total dunks in 2 years and career ~ 1% oreb/9.8 dreb indicates poor functional verticality. Sure, low major BPMs are somewhat deflated, but career 3.5 bpm in the Big West is pretty terrible. Not to mention, Ajay is relatively old for his class. He is a junior, but he’s senior-aged and will turn 22 just days after the draft.
It’s important to understand how big of a gap it is from Big West basketball to high major basketball. While some aspects of this transition are overblown, especially in relying on particularly atrocious lowmajor → high major transitions as of late prospects (hello Andrew Rohde), there are a few key skills that are demonstrably more difficult in high major environments. Perhaps the most notable of these facets is scoring at the rim. Look no further than Zyon Pullin, the UC Riverside transfer who had a strong year at Florida. While many of his rate stats were maintained or even improved this year in the SEC, the notable drop occurred in finishing percentage. You’ll find this trend amongst most low major to high major prospects, or even in observing the finishing percentage differential for low major prospects in conference play vs non-conference play (versus high major schools). Finishing numbers should be inflated in a low major environment. And Ajay’s lack of relative interior dominance in the Big West is quite concerning, especially since his interior scoring is one of his primary sells as a prospect.
What makes me even more concerned, however, is Ajay’s lack of 3P volume. Yes, I’m quite moved by Ajay’s touch: career 82% FT, along with excellent runner frequency (52/106 over the last two seasons!). Ajay is an excellent midrange shooter as well. But the 3P volume simply isn’t there. He’s shooting 63/194 3P% (32%) over 3 seasons, peaking at 5 3s/100 this year. Most of these makes are coming off spotups/c&s looks.
It seems relatively obvious that a player with such strong touch indicators will develop a go-to 3P shot. Perhaps he will. But objectively, this is a 22 year old with as many career 3s as Brogdon had in his senior season. Ajay is projected as a backup point guard type, with theoretical upside as a secondary ball handler that can handle the offense in spurts. The bar for 3P shotmaking is through the roof for these types of roles. Moreso than any other productive player for a given archetype, there are so many senior aged players every year that are adept PnR operators and elite three-level pullup shooters that just never pan out. Even in just the last 3 years, guys like Jared Butler, Tre Mann, Jaden Ivey, Wendell Moore were all cerebral passers and strong finishers but just aren’t productive enough shotmakers to get a chance. Jury is still out of course, but the bar for shotmaking is super duper high.
There is a pretty limited track record for projecting midrange shotmaking and touch to 3P volume. I fell for a similar trap with Malaki Branham, and there’s been a few prospects in recent years whose hesitance from 3 appeared to be a trap (Johnny Davis, Killian Hayes). I’ve heard the argument that Ajay could be a good shooter if he desired to, but this is a bit too much storytelling for me to feel comfortable. The highest proportion of Ajay’s 3P were from unguarded C&S, and there’s immediately an unlikely probability of him developing a proclivity for shooting 3s at high volume.
Not only does he have to be good at shooting 3Ps at volume, he’s gotta be a dynamic 3 level scorer. Contrary to public opinion, and despite my worries about its feasibility, I think simply boosting 3P volume is the least of Ajay’s worries. I’m more interested in how strong of a shotmaker he can be to quell worries of falling in line with the aforementioned guys who simply weren’t dynamic enough to warrant a strong enough niche in the league. In tandem with my skepticism with his rim scoring, his 3P volume boost, his age, conference, and lack of general productivity, Ajay’s barrier to entry as a rotational guard seems incredibly high.
High Perspective
McCain’s drawbacks are obvious. He’s an undersized, one-position defender with an even wingspan and limited run-jump athleticism. It’s tough to carve out a role in the NBA as a small guard, especially one without an overly dynamic handle or the burst to create advantages downhill.
However, McCain’s top skill is clearly NBA level. He hit 41.4% of his threes on high volume (11 attempts/100) and 88.5% of his free throws at Duke this past season. Some more minute numbers: McCain shot 56.5% on transition threes (30/53) and 42.1% on catch-and-shoots (159 attempts). His shot prep is incredible, always with his hands up ready to catch and fire. McCain’s body control and self-organization skills lend themselves well to movement shooting. The big question is how much the pull-up three volume can increase. McCain performed well on off-the-dribble threes this year (37.0% on 54 shots), but it will be vital for him to have these shots in his diet if he is to hit an uber-high offensive outcome. Even though he isn’t a traditional blow-by advantage creator, McCain’s shooting gravity blends defenses. He generally does a good job passing out of doubles and keeping opponents in rotation.
My case for McCain as a top 20 player in this class is simply that NBA players need to have true NBA skills that keep them on the floor. There isn’t a catch here – McCain is a safe bet to be a very good professional sniper.
Low Perspective
Jared McCain is an elite shooter, that much is clear. At over 10 threes per 100 possessions, McCain converted at a 41% rate. It is everywhere else about his game that I’m concerned.
First, McCain is old for a freshman, already 20. That’s not a death knell by any means, but makes his shooting display much less rare – historically, about twice as many sophomores are at his level of offensive output (PRPG!) and outside shooting (3P% and 3PA/100) than freshmen.
Second, he struggles a lot with ball pressure. While he was above average efficiency in every play type he engaged in, when the defense committed out of PNR his efficiency fell from the 93rd to the 33rd percentile.
Third, he is highly unlikely to be a positive defender. McCain is a 6’2’’ shooting guard with a 25.5’’ standing vertical. Blocks aren’t everything when evaluating guard defense, but they do give you a sense of quality of contests. McCain had two all season.
Finally, while McCain was a good finisher in traffic and on threes where guarded closely, he generally lacked consistent advantage creation. This, in combination with his low 11% assist rate, prevent him from having a chance of being a creator. He is not the same level of playmaker as a Jamal Murray nor is he as big as Devin Booker, his closest statistical comps who made All-Star games.
I really want to believe in McCain. He is a delight to watch and makes improbable plays constantly. I would not be surprised if I was proven wrong. But this is not a bet I would want to make until the very end of the first or early second round.
| Rank | Name | Position | Description |
| 31 | Melvin Ajinca | Guard | Confident shot maker with two-way value |
| 32 | Oso Ighodaro | Big | Switch-friendly savvy passer |
| 33 | Baylor Scheierman | Forward | Top-notch outside shooter who rebounds |
| 34 | Tidjane Salaun | Forward | Young energy wing with shotmaking promise |
| 35 | Nikola Djurisic | Guard | Bursty versatile ballhandler |
| 36 | Terrence Shannon Jr. | Guard | Lightning fast scorer with defensive strengths |
| 37 | Tristan da Silva | Forward | Versatile swiss-army knife forward with shooting potential |
| 38 | Tyler Kolek | Guard | High feel playmaker with elite passing ability |
| 39 | Pacome Dadiet | Forward | Smooth, young wing with shot-making upside |
| 40 | Jamal Shead | Guard | Floor general and terror defensively |
| 41 | Dillon Jones | Guard | Creation-heavy mid-major athlete |
| 42 | PJ Hall | Forward | Physical interior player who can step outside |
| 43 | Adem Bona | Big | Scheme versatile rim protector |
| 44 | Trey Alexander | Guard | Versatile with elite touch but slow first step |
| 45 | Reece Beekman | Guard | Smart, unrelenting defender with some offense |
| 46 | Justin Edwards | Forward | Top recruit with talent across the board |
| 47 | Anton Watson | Forward | High feel defensive minded forward |
| 48 | Kyshawn George | Forward | Devastating outside shooter with some athleticism |
| 49 | Tristen Newton | Guard | Combo guard who can shoot, pass, defend |
| 50 | Ulrich Chomche | Big | Raw big with intriguing physical tools |
| 51 | Judah Mintz | Guard | Shifty midrange scorer |
| 52 | Cam Spencer | Guard | Tough-nosed ready-to-play point guard |
| 53 | Juan Nunez | Guard | Creative passer with athletic limitations |
| 54 | Riley Minix | Forward | Division II call-up with strong production and shotmaking |
| 55 | Cam Christie | Guard | Young three point marksman |
| 56 | Pelle Larsson | Guard | Three-level scorer with some versatility |
| 57 | Bobi Klintman | Forward | Signs of promise as a three-and-D wing |
| 58 | David Jones | Forward | Tough defender with shotmaking development |
| 59 | Keshad Johnson | Forward | Broad-shouldered play finisher |
| 60 | Harrison Ingram | Forward | Versatile wing with limited athleticism |