The Wemby Tier

1. Victor Wembanyama, Big, Metropolitans 92

As much as I loved them as prospects, this is why you can’t call guys like Cade Cunningham, Evan Mobley, and Chet Holmgren generational. Because if you do, what in God’s name do you call Victor Wembanyama? Once in a lifetime? Once in an epoch? I don’t even know what to say about Wemby that hasn’t already been said a hundred times. We have never seen someone as tall as Wemby (7’5) move as fluidly as he does while displaying touch from every area of the floor. Oh and by the way, he also anchored the number two defense in France and led his team to their first ever finals appearance as a 19 year old. 

Let’s start with Wemby’s defense. No one is safe against Wemby in the paint. He uses his 8’0 wingspan to block shots at an absurd rate (9.7 BLK% this year). Rim protection has always been Wemby’s best skill, as he led the Euroleague in blocks as an 18 year old with ASVEL last year. Wemby’s unique physical makeup allows him to block and alter shots that no one has ever been able to. That play where he was backpedaling in transition, flipped his hips, and blocked an alley-oop is just one of many examples of Wemby using his otherworldly tools functionally on defense. He covers a lot of ground in the halfcourt too. He often finds himself in positions that would leave most bigs out of the play, only to swoop in and bother the shot. He does stuff like this while only averaging 2.1 fouls per game as well! The discipline Wemby shows to not get sloppy when protecting the rim is remarkable. Wemby is going to be a killer drop defender in the NBA, but he also shows proficiency at the level of ball screens. He slides with perimeter players and gives them problems with his length. Wemby’s hands are also surprisingly quick. He occasionally strips ball handlers and can initiate the ensuing transition opportunities. Given his tools, smarts, and pedigree on defense, I feel comfortable projecting Wemby to be contending for DPOY awards throughout his career.

Then there is the offense. Turn on any highlight tape or game of Wemby’s, and you will see jaw-dropping shot-creation and dribble combinations that you can never quite believe a 7’5 player is uncorking. His move from ASVEL to Metropolitans 92 allowed him more freedom to explore his shotmaking, which likely dragged down his percentages, but helped his long term development. As I am writing, he has only shot 27.6 from three this season, which is the one hair in the soup for Wemby’s statistical profile. But, I am not worried about that. Given the degree of difficulty on some of these shots and his natural touch (81.3 FT%), it’s pretty safe to say that Wemby is going to shoot. The Spurs should trust him as both a catch and shoot threat and an isolation scorer from day one. His work in the midrange is deadly, especially his turnaround jumper, which no one can feasibly block. Wemby also hits stepback threes with regularity, and he might be the player who officially ushers the three point floater into the game of basketball. Once again, this man is 7’5!  

Wemby’s passing stands out too. He needs to clean up his turnovers by acting on his decisions quicker and not telegraphing his passes. But, he can pass off a live dribble and hit cutters and spot up shooters accurately. Wemby is also great at hitting the dunker’s spot in short roll situations. I wouldn’t describe him as a manipulative passer, but he won’t need manipulation to be an effective playmaker. He finds the open man following double teams with ease, and he will only improve his more advanced reads with time. Wemby posted 99 assists and 121 turnovers this season (0.82 AST:TO), an encouraging ratio for a big man prospect in Europe. For reference, Marc Gasol had a 0.9 AST:TO ratio in his pre-draft year, and he was the best big man passer in the league until a certain Serbian showed up. Wemby should only improve as a playmaker over time. 

Are there flaws in Wemby’s game? Sure. He can’t quite punish height mismatches in the post by backing them down, and instead has to rely on shooting over them every single time. Again, his 3P% has to increase, which his FT% and the eye test already suggest will happen. It feels weird to even discuss this stuff because these flaws won’t matter in the grand scheme of things. They certainly will not prevent him from being the obvious choice at number one. The other discussion surrounding Wemby is what his frame will mean for his NBA longevity. There’s no ignoring the truth: players above a certain height have had trouble staying healthy in years past. Former number one picks Ralph Sampson (7’4) and Yao Ming (7’6) were the consensus choices at the time, but knee, back, and foot injuries prevented them from having long careers. But, Wemby and his camp seem to have taken these cautionary tales into account and have worked diligently on his body. At this point, Wemby’s long and detailed warm-up routine is well documented. If he suffers a career setback due to injury, it won’t be because he neglected to address potential medical issues. 

Not only is Wemby the obvious choice at number one, he is by far the best prospect I have evaluated in my time as an armchair scout. He is the prize of the last ten drafts, and is likely to be the prize of the next ten drafts. With his combination of size, fluidity, scoring, playmaking, and elite defensive potential, there’s no telling how good Wemby can become. The Spurs have once again lucked into the big man prospect of the decade, and he will vault them into contention within the next few years. 

Tier 1

2. Scoot Henderson, Guard, G League Ignite

He doesn’t hold a candle to Wemby, but Scoot Henderson is a great prospect in his own right and by far the next best swing for stardom in this class. For starters, Scoot’s per 100 line in the G League is ridiculous, as he put up 27.5 points, 7.9 rebounds, 10.2 assists, 1.9 steals, and 5.1 turnovers. Scoot is a force when his motor is fully revved up. Even though he stands at only 6’2, Scoot is built like a semi truck. He boasts a 6’9 wingspan in addition to his chiseled 200 pound frame, which ought to quell any concerns about his size at the next level (yes, some people are actually concerned about this for some reason). He uses his powerful frame to brush off contact and finish with ease. Scoot also has some craft around the rim, utilizing reverses as well as changing up his body angles and timing with his footwork. When he has a head of steam, Scoot threatens to posterize rim protectors

Scoot’s shot, while a work in progress, projects to be an asset at the next level. He shot 32.4% from three in his regular season and showcase games, in addition to an even 75 percent from the line. Scoot is not comfortable shooting off the dribble from three yet. Some people are skeptical that he will get there. But, in his higher end outcomes, I think a pull up three is very attainable. Teams will go under on ball screens at the start of Scoot’s career until he can reliably punish teams for doing so. He will have more time to get his pull up three off in these situations, and he can concentrate on speeding up the decision to shoot as he improves his efficiency there. 

Where Scoot thrives is in the midrange. I love how polished Scoot is setting up these shots. He takes what the defense gives him in drop coverage, and his pull up is an effective counter on drives to the basket. He settles for too many jumpers from there rather than attacking the rim, but the concern over this phenomenon is overblown with Scoot. Sam Vecenie of The Athletic brought forth the idea that Scoot phoned in his rim attacks and contact seeking in order to avoid injury. I think there’s some credence to this idea. The G-League Ignite program is all about securing a high draft pick for these prospects, not necessarily competing at the highest level. So, you can hardly blame Scoot for taking his foot off the gas when he solidified his status as a lock for the top three. 

Because of this, improvements to Scoot’s scoring game inside the arc are imminent. I suspect he will find himself at the rim and the free throw line much more starting from early in his career. Shot selection issues almost never derail prospects with the physical tools of Scoot’s caliber. When their coaches emphasize getting to the efficient spots they can relentlessly attack, these players usually adjust. Look at how quickly Anthony Edwards dialed up his rim pressure in the NBA; I think Scoot will undergo a similar development process. 

Scoot also makes virtually every pass in the book. An AST:TO ratio of 2 and 10.2 AST per 100 demonstrate how advanced of a passer Scoot is for his age. He collapses defenses and sprays the ball to shooters off a live dribble. He is creative with his interior passes, as he expertly manipulates bigs in the paint on dump offs and lobs. Weakside skip passes have become necessary for NBA primaries, and Scoot already shows aptitude in that department. With his physical tools and quick decision making, he’s going to be a transition nightmare as well. 

Defensively, Scoot has the tools to be good, but there’s a ton he needs to clean up. When he’s on, Scoot navigates screens well on the ball, and he gets into ball handlers and disrupts them. But, his tape contained a ton of preventable blowbys where he was barely in a stance. This is hardly atypical for a young primary initiator, but you’d hope to see a little more from Scoot given his physical tools. Off the ball, Scoot got caught ball watching too much, and his steal rate of 1.9 per 100 doesn’t sway me in a positive direction here. His closeouts could use a great deal of improvement as well. I have no doubt that Scoot’s defense will improve as his career goes on, but the degree of improvement remains to be seen. 

Scoot’s athleticism, projectable jump shot, advanced passing, and reported intangibles make him an excellent primary initiator bet. Primary initiators are the players we think of as stars in the NBA. This makes Scoot the clear-cut number two prospect in this draft. Charlotte, don’t mess this up. 

Tier 2

In the past, my Tier 2 has been reserved for prospects who are confident All-Star bets with a chance to deservedly command a max contract down the line. Obviously, Wemby and Scoot both slotted in above this tier. I believe Scoot can make All-NBA teams down the line. Wemby, well, nothing is off the table for him. After these two prospects, the talent drops off significantly in my eyes. Don’t get me wrong, there are still plenty of great prospects with star upside in this class. But, they are much less obvious from here on out. Thus, I don’t feel confident enough in anyone else to put them in Tier 2 or above. Let’s move on. 

Tier 3

3. Cam Whitmore, Wing, Villanova

I still can’t really believe I am doing this, but here it is. Cam Whitmore at three – the same Cam Whitmore who seemingly averaged one pass per game at Villanova. If you read my last article, first of all, thank you. Second of all, you know that Cam Whitmore has what I call a compounding skills profile. “Compounding skills” refers to a development pathway many great players have undergone: a raw and fluid athlete who builds on flashes of perimeter skill until they are a complete offensive player. Make no mistake, Whitmore has as big a learning curve as any compounding skills prospect I have seen. His 6.4 AST% is historically low, and the efficiency of his pull up game leaves a lot to be desired. And yet, there have been too many compounding skills success stories for me to put Whitmore any lower than this. With compounding skills prospects, we are shooting for a fairly complete offensive player down the line. But, as I said, Whitmore’s passing and off the dribble game are clearly not where they need to be. So, what am I betting on with Whitmore? 

First off, he has a lot of time on his side with a July 2004 birthday. He’s a year and a half younger than the Thompson twins and close to two full years younger than Brandon Miller, three players who are often mocked higher than Whitmore. That age difference has gone underdiscussed throughout this draft cycle. Secondly, Whitmore is a mutant of an athlete. His preference for two-foot leaping could present some initial bumps in the road around the rim. But, it’s hard to get hung up on that when Whitmore has the best speed/power combination I’ve seen since Anthony Edwards. At 6’6, 230, Whitmore is a downhill force. His flashes as a driver are special. He can get downhill and completely displace defenders. Even against good on-ball defenders, he can easily get his shoulder past them and finish through contact. Whitmore has legitimate touch around the rim and can utilize a lot of finishing angles when his initial plan is cut off. 

Additionally, Whitmore has enough perimeter skill to suggest that he can become a great three-level scorer down the line. I think his handle is underrated. He keeps the ball under control on drives, and he already has some go-to moves to create shots for himself, including a polished stepback. The shot itself looks good to me. He shot 34.3 percent from three on 9.4 attempts per 100, which for his age is actually pretty encouraging. Many of these shots came from comfortably outside NBA range as well. He only shot 70.3 percent from the line, but I trust Whitmore’s mechanics and the deep range he already possesses will make him a trustworthy shooter at the next level. 

Whitmore’s shot selection is a Moreyball dream. He exclusively operates at the rim and from three, which probably inflated his 55.1 eFG% (good number for an 18 year old college wing). This ought to help him as a play finisher in his first couple years in the NBA, but if he is going to become an on-ball scorer, he’ll likely need to develop a midrange game. His attempts at pull ups or floaters inside the arc were rare, and when they occurred it didn’t look pretty. Whitmore has some serious work to do here, but he has the time to get it done. Passing is the other glaring weakness in Whitmore’s game. I’ve already mentioned his woeful 6.4 AST%, and his slow processing prevents him from creating more advantages for himself and others. Whitmore would benefit tremendously from eliminating that extra beat that he takes every time he gets the ball before deciding what to do. I’ve liked some of the passing flashes I’ve seen from him, he executed some nice live dribble dump offs and the occasional skip pass. But, they were flashes in every sense of the word. If you blinked, you might have missed them. 

Defensively, Whitmore has serious flashes to build on going forward. He can be a terror on the ball, using his strength and lateral quickness to get into ball handlers and guard multiple positions. While his team defense is messy right now, Whitmore still nabbed 3.2 steals per 100 and showed some amazing weak side rim protection. Historically, scouts have gotten burned when talking about prospects like Whitmore defensively. They get hung up on the effort level when the tools are so clearly there. Andrew Wiggins and Anthony Edwards are two examples of compounding skills players who were deservedly flamed for their defensive effort (in Wiggins’ case, comfortably into his NBA career). But, they turned into excellent defensive stoppers. You want to bet on the talent and tools combo every single time, and Whitmore has both in spades defensively. 

I’ll close with a principle that I solidified back in 2020 because of Anthony Edwards: with young and powerful athletes, focus on the flashes. If these prospects can do something once, chances are they can do it again until they make it a habit. Before you know it, you have an All-Star on your team. Developing Whitmore is going to require patience. But, if he follows the compounding skills trajectory I expect him to, he can turn into the two-way wing shot creator that NBA teams crave.

4. Jarace Walker, Forward, Houston

Those who follow my work will know that I have talked about Jarace Walker ad nauseam. My false ceiling alarm bells went off early in the college season, and I haven’t shifted my position since. Jarace was a key contributor on both ends to a Houston team that finished number one in pre-tournament KenPom rankings. He had an eye-popping statline of 25.2 points, 15.2 rebounds, 4 assists, 2.2 steals, and 2.9 blocks per 100 possessions. That high level impact on the box score was good for an 8.8 BPM as well. 

We know what Jarace can do as a connector, and I expect him to contribute in a similar manner from the jump in the NBA. It’s rare to find a 6’7, 240 pound forward who processes the game as quickly as Jarace does. Look no further than his passing, where he seems to always find holes in the defense and exploit them. The ball never sticks with Jarace. He has a knack for keeping the ball moving and optimizing the offensive possession for his team. He only averaged 3.3 turnovers per 100 relative to his four assists, only reaffirming Jarace’s top tier court mapping and lightning quick decision making. His short roll passing is outstanding, and if you need someone to just stand at the nail and make decisions, Jarace is that guy. 

Additionally, Jarace is an amazing defender. I already mentioned his stock numbers, which were so good because of his unbelievable team defense. He flies out of nowhere to block shots regularly, and he can read ball handlers and play the passing lanes brilliantly. As a help side rim protecting four, Jarace has the potential to make a huge impact. Even though he is just 6’7, Jarace also showed some coverage versatility as the roll man defender in ball screens. Houston trusted him to hedge ball screens, drop, play at the level, pretty much everything. I want to reiterate that Houston was KenPom’s number one team and number one defense before the tournament. The fact that Jarace had this large of a role in both those rankings as a freshman has been another underdiscussed talking point this draft cycle. On the ball, Jarace’s hips can be a bit slow, so he is susceptible to quick changes of direction. But, he’s light on his feet, and he uses his fast hands to jar the ball loose and earn transition opportunities. He might not be an elite wing stopper, but Jarace has enough to build on for his on-ball defense. 

The degree to which Jarace’s scoring game develops will dictate his upside. At 25.1 points per 100, he was far from a non-scorer in college. But, he was reluctant to attack the rim, and he wasn’t super efficient away from the rim either. There are certainly justifiable concerns with how Jarace is going to score in the NBA. However, Jarace’s placement on my board should indicate that I believe he’s going to find a way to score. 

For starters, I think Jarace is going to shoot. Last season, he shot 34.7 percent from three and 66.3 percent from the line, hardly a resounding point in his favor. But, Jarace’s mechanical improvements from his senior year of high school to college were remarkable. He also shows good touch in the short midrange areas, especially with that floater that he loves. I always cite unassisted two point jumpers as a strong indicator for shooting when traditional indicators fail, and Jarace hit 30 of them. I love the direction Jarace’s shot is headed, and his elite processing indicates that he has the neuroplasticity required for further development. I can’t help but project Jarace as a reliable catch and shoot threat at the very least. I also don’t think self-creation is out of the question in Jarace’s high end outcomes. We’ve seen guys who specialize in the close midrange area at the college level slowly develop their isolation scoring. What’s awesome is that Houston gave Jarace iso opportunities throughout the season, and he delivered in some key moments. As a UVA fan, I remember him cooking us with fadeaways down the stretch all too well. 

It’s difficult to see how Jarace fails in the NBA. Teams always look for players in Jarace’s mold: smart and versatile wings who can impact the game in many different ways. The floor is incredibly high here, and Jarace will be afforded opportunities to experiment and add to his game as a result. I’d be shocked if Jarace does not find himself playing in high stakes games for at least a decade in the NBA. 

5. Taylor Hendricks, Forward, UCF

Taylor Hendricks: false ceiling prospect number two in this draft. Hendricks had a truly meteoric rise this year. He went from number 46 in the RSCI rankings to a consensus lottery pick and the fifth player on my board. I understand if you are skeptical of ranking Hendricks this high. But, let me ask you something: how many prospects in recent memory have met Hendricks’ thresholds of youth, size, shooting, athleticism, and incredible defense? It’s not that many, right? There’s Jabari Smith last year, and the next one I can think of is Jaren Jackson. I wasn’t scouting prospects in 2018, but I know that Jaren was clearly a better prospect than both Jabari Smith and Taylor Hendricks. These are not direct comparisons. The point is that using Hendricks as a threshold for the categories above sets the bar quite high.. 

The first thing that stands out about Hendricks is his size and shooting combo. At 6’9, 215 pounds, Hendricks shot 39.4 percent from three on eight attempts per 100 and 78.2 percent from the line. He shoots a comfortable ball with a high release point that is tough to contest. Similarly to Jarace Walker, Hendricks has greatly improved his jump shot since high school. He only shot 31.2% from three in his last two years of high school and EYBL play (hat tip to Maxwell Baumbach, @BaumBoards on Twitter for that stat). To go from that to nearly 40 percent is quite impressive, and the free throw percentage suggests that it is sustainable. The high release point and touch could lend themselves to improvements off the dribble as well. This process played out with guys like Khris Middleton, Kawhi Leonard, and Mikal Bridges. 

Hendricks’ athleticism also stands out, and he already uses it functionally as an off ball player on offense. He excels as a cutter and playing out of the dunker’s spot, as demonstrated by his 36 dunks on the year. While still a work in progress, Hendricks’ flashes of attacking closeouts have looked good too. I trust that to continue being a weapon for him as NBA defenders begin to respect his shot. The drawbacks with Hendricks offensively are his handle and playmaking ability. I love the functional athleticism, but his loose handle sometimes prevents him from fully taking advantage of his gifts. I think Hendricks’ current handle woes lead to some of his difficulties with unassisted looks at the rim, which has been a common criticism of Hendricks. Guys with Hendricks’ athleticism often experience improvements to their handle, and improvement as a dribbler will help Hendricks attack the rim off the dribble efficiently.  

Hendricks also isn’t much of a passer at this stage, and he unfortunately does not have the first step of someone like Cam Whitmore which lends itself to passing improvement. He is limited to fairly basic reactive reads, only processing what’s happening in his direct field of vision. Hendricks averaged 2.4 assists per 100 and 2.5 turnovers. I like that his AST:TO ratio is around one, but that’s a small amount of assists relative to his usage. I suspect that Hendricks’ passing will be another beneficiary of an improved handle, but the degree of improvement remains to be seen. 

Where Hendricks really shines is on defense. I honestly think he is on a similar level to Jarace Walker on that end. He used his size, verticality, and timing to be a force of a helpside rim protector. Hendricks averaged 3.0 blocks per 100 and only 3.5 fouls. He already has an advanced verticality technique, and he uses his frame and leaping ability to stifle drivers at the rim. Hendricks can cover an insane amount of ground on these rotations too. This allows him to close out to shooters from further away than most players as well. Additionally, Hendricks will guard anyone you need him to on the perimeter. He has fluid hips, slides his feet, and likes to get close to ball handlers and bother them with his length. Unlike Jarace, I’m not sure I trust Hendricks to be the roll man defender in ball screens. His role is going to be a wing stopper and help defender, and I think he will excel. 

Closing the loop here, I want to share a Barttorvik query I stumbled upon. Do you want to know the only two freshmen in that database to have an eFG% > 55, BLK% > 5, 3PA/100 > 7, and over 30 dunks? Taylor Hendricks and Jaren Jackson Jr. That is it. I mentioned the traits of youth, size, shooting, athleticism, and defense. I also mentioned that Hendricks sets an incredibly high bar for those attributes. The eye test informed that take, but a statistical search using numbers close to Hendricks’ marks corroborated it. Hendricks will thrive in a 3&D role immediately, and if you think that is where a 19 year old kid will stop his development, you are sorely mistaken. If Hendricks is drafted in the 7-14 range, he has a chance to be a steal in this draft.  

6. Brandon Miller, Wing, Alabama

As a 6’9 freshman, Brandon Miller was arguably the best perimeter player in college basketball this past year. He was a consensus All-American and led Alabama to the overall number one seed in the NCAA tournament. His 12.0 BPM led all freshmen in the country. Oh, and he did this all with a skillset that directly translates to the NBA, having shot 38.4 percent from three on 12.6 attempts per 100. So, what’s he doing here and not comfortably ranked third? 

First, there’s the issue of his age. I alluded to it earlier, but Miller is OLD for a freshman. A November 2002 birthday will make him 20.6 years old on draft night. He’s only three months younger than TCU junior guard Mike Miles! Taylor Hendricks is a year younger to the day than Brandon Miller; Jarace Walker is ten months younger; Cam Whitmore is almost two years younger. I could keep going. That age difference really matters when considering the development curves of these prospects. 

Second, while the production can’t be denied, I’m not sure I trust Miller to be an effective on-ball star in the NBA. He doesn’t have the functional strength or flexibility that the game’s best wing creators have. He isn’t all that bursty, and he struggles as soon as he faces a lot of contact in the lane. According to Synergy, Miller shot 39.3 percent at the rim in the half court, which is…not ideal. He lacks craft around the rim and the aforementioned athletic limitations hinder him in that area too. Miller also only shot 33.3% from the midrange, albeit on mostly unassisted looks. Miller found a way to produce and impact winning at a high level despite his limitations inside the arc, in large part due to the fact that he was a flamethrower from three. I already mentioned the volume and efficiency, and it’s worth noting that Miller can splash in shots from deep off the catch, off movement, or off the dribble. The ball comes out flat on his shot, but you can’t argue with the results. An 85.9 FT% on 170 total attempts this season only provides further evidence for Miller’s outside shooting aptitude.

Miller also dramatically improved as a dribbler and passer throughout the season. His handle can be a bit high and loose, but Alabama trusted him to initiate offense more as the season went on. He operated in ball screens and could make good passes with either hand. I also really liked Miller as a fast break initiator, where he pushes the pace and finds open teammates quickly. In order for Miller to run pick and roll in the NBA, he needs to improve the velocity and accuracy of his passes. Some of Miller’s passes were wild, especially early on, but I like that he tightened up his passes as the season went on. 

Defensively, Miller projects as solid but not spectacular. I can’t think of one standout skill for Miller on this end. He didn’t generate a lot of stocks or completely hound guys on the ball. But, his rotations were sound, he held up just fine on the ball, and he rarely made any egregious mistakes. Miller didn’t wow me like Walker and Hendricks did, but I trust him to be a neutral to slightly positive defender at the next level. 

Miller is a weirdly tough evaluation. Normally, I’d see a freshman who produced at the level Miller did and put him in Tier 1 or Tier 2 without thinking twice. That seems to be what the NBA has done. However, when you dig deeper, it’s hard to project Miller as a quality star player. Does he have the functional strength, bend, balance, or craft to create inside the arc in the NBA? Is his handle good enough to earn on-ball reps in the NBA? If not, what exactly is he at the next level? The answer there is a ridiculous wing shooter with some tertiary playmaking capabilities and competent defense. That’s a great player to have, but we’re not talking about the next Paul George here. There’s no question that Miller is a great basketball player, and I am valuing his high floor here with the list of sure things dwindling quickly. But, I can’t get as excited about his upside as the NBA seems to be. 

7. Cason Wallace, Guard, Kentucky

Cason Wallace seems to have fallen on mainstream boards, but I am not reacting to that. People are getting hung up on his size and projected role, a 3&D guard. Pencling him into this role ignores an important question: are we sure this guy is only a 3&D guard? At only 6’3, Wallace will mostly be the smallest guy on the floor in effective lineups. He will absolutely be able to play that role, A closer look indicated that Wallace might be able to bear a greater offensive load down the line. 

For starters, Wallace finished well at the rim. He could stand to get there more often, but he shot a whopping 71.2% at the rim, with just 9.2% of those looks being assisted, according to Barttorvik. Wallace also finished with 11 dunks on the season, an indicator that Wallace is underrated as an athlete. Wallace could be passive at times, and he was playing hurt for a portion of the season. None of that helped him shine as an athlete, but I love his functional strength and deceleration on the offensive end. Outside Kentucky’s system, Wallace will have more space to operate on drives and I trust that the rim volume will increase without affecting his efficiency. 

Wallace also has enough off the dribble prowess to build on for potential primary ball handler reps. According to HoopMath, he made 40 unassisted two-point jumpers, which bodes well for Wallace’s outside shooting. Wallace’s tough shotmaking in the midrange makes me more optimistic about his shot than a fairly pedestrian 34.6 3P% and 75.7% FT% otherwise would. Another great indicator for future primaries is an AST%:USG% ratio > 1. It’s rare for players to achieve this, and Wallace hit that ratio comfortably with a 24.3 AST% to a 19.9 USG%. For someone who’s almost exclusively labeled a combo guard, Wallace checks a lot of boxes for a pure point guard prospect. 

Additionally, Wallace’s defense is incredible. His 6’9 wingspan allows him to play bigger than his size both on and off the ball. Off the ball, Wallace’s screen navigation, anticipation, and rotations are top notch. His 3.7 steals per 100 (historically great rate for a freshman guard) reflect that aptitude. On the ball, Wallace terrorizes ball handlers with his lateral quickness, fast hands, and functional strength. It’s nearly impossible for ball handlers to overpower Wallace, and he is the most disruptive point-of-attack defender in this class as well. That’s a pretty good combination!

Honestly, there aren’t many bones to pick with Wallace. I wish he could separate from defenders more and generate easier looks. I wish he was a little more assertive and willing to command the offense more. Also, while Wallace meets many basic thresholds for skills like shooting off the dribble and attacking the rim, he is far from elite in those areas. It’s possible that the small sample size of one season inflated his numbers there and we don’t have a clear picture. 

See? I’m already grasping at straws while trying to nitpick. Wallace can capably dribble, pass, make great decisions, shoot from the midrange and three, and defend at an elite level. A Marcus Smart 3&D+ outcome is very attainable for him. Plus, who knows? Maybe Wallace is next in a long line of Kentucky guards whose potential was hidden under Coach Calipari. 

8. Leonard Miller, Forward, G-League Ignite

The departure from consensus continues! Leonard Miller is easily the most underrated player in the 2023 class. I made the elevator pitch for Miller in my last article, so I want to quote myself here: 

As a 19 year old, Leonard Miller put up a per 100 statline of 28.0 points, 17.1 rebounds, 2.5 assists, 1.4 steals, and 1.2 blocks. You could argue he’s had the best statistical season of any G-League Ignite prospect in the team’s history, including Scoot and Jalen Green! This was all as a raw prospect who was playing his first real stint of high level basketball coming off of an enigmatic high school career. But wait, it gets better. He was efficient (64 TS%) and he only averaged 2.3 turnovers per 100, putting his AST:TO ratio on the right side of one. 

What’s crazy is that when you watch Miller play, it seems like there is so much he can improve upon. This is what made me high on Tari Eason last year. He was able to have a highly productive season while still leaving a lot of meat on the bone for skill development. […] These guys are always good bets because they are often among the best functional athletes in their draft class, which gives them a nice baseline as the rest of their game develops. Miller is no different. I think he’s a no-brainer top ten guy in this class. 

A couple things to add here. First, addressing the concern of Miller’s shot. There’s no question the mechanics are wonky. His lower body is all over the place, and his upper body often has to contort itself to stay in alignment. This results in an impractical shooting motion, and it had a lot to do with his 30.4 percent clip from three in the Regular Season and Showcase games. The good news is Leonard has real touch. He shot 79.2 percent from the line and showed amazing touch finishing at the rim. When projecting shooting, I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to guys with touch, and Miller has it. The fact that he shot as well as he did with those mechanics might actually be a point in his favor.  

Some people also seem concerned with what role Miller will have in the NBA. My answer to that right now: I have no idea. My best guess is he starts out as an energy guy who finishes at the rim, makes good decisions, and plays defense. As his career progresses, he’ll earn more responsibilities than that, and the shot will ultimately dictate how much room Miller has to grow. I’m not a coach, and I’ll own up to the fact that I’m not sure what the specific plan should be for Leonard Miller early on. However, I am confident that there is a role for a 6’10 functionally athletic, coordinated, and smart two-way player with budding perimeter skills. I trust an NBA coach to find that role. 

You don’t see a prospect with Leonard Miller’s development curve every draft cycle. He was a guard who had a late growth spurt. He went from playing against unremarkable Canadian high school competition to thriving against grown men in the G-League within a year. That’s incredible. It also helps that everyone who’s in the know says that Miller is an unbelievable human being who’s hungry to learn and get better. You want Leonard Miller on your basketball team. Draft him with confidence. 

9. Gradey Dick, Wing, Kansas

The easy sales pitch for Gradey Dick is he’s 6’8 and has been a 40 percent three point shooter since he got his learner’s permit. His pristine mechanics, touch, high release point, and shot versatility make him one of the best shooting prospects I’ve evaluated. As far as his basic shooting numbers go, 40.3 3P% on 10.0 attempts per 100 and 85.4 percent at the line in his lone season at Kansas. 

Everyone knows about the shooting, but Gradey’s unheralded ancillary skills on offense really stand out. Chief among them is his cutting. Gradey weaponizes his shooting gravity to lure defenders close and decisively cut behind them. Gradey generates lots of easy rim attempts in this way, and he uses clever body control and angles to finish. Don’t sleep on Gradey’s vertical pop following a backdoor cut either. When he builds up a head of steam, he’s a threat to finish emphatically above the rim off a lob pass. His 15 dunks on the season back that up. 

Additionally, Gradey’s passing is underrated. He won’t be a primary initiator, but Gradey can pick teams apart coming off curls or attacking closeouts. He makes quick reads and rarely misses an extra pass. Gradey will occasionally fit the ball through tight windows in transition, and he made a couple nice weakside skips when nothing else was on. With regards to those skip passes, Gradey usually executed them after surveying the court for a few seconds. He rarely uncorked those off of pure instinct. That doesn’t matter too much though. Gradey is fantastic at simple passes and the movement off of them required for functioning in an NBA offense. For those wondering about his AST:TO ratio, it was comfortably above one at 1.25. 

Defensively, some scouts have completely written Gradey off. Personally, I am a bit more optimistic. I share the concerns about Gradey’s athleticism with everyone else. He needs to get much stronger in order to absorb contact, and quicker players have their way with Gradey when they make him move laterally. However, I think Gradey has a chance to make up for his physical limitations with smarts and effort. His 0.8 BLK% doesn’t jump off the page, but I thought Gradey flashed really good verticality technique and use of his length around the rim. His rotations tend to be good too, even if the athleticism takes away some of their efficacy. Gradey has quick hands too, which makes him effective on digs and occasionally surprising guys at the point of attack. A 2.5 STL% reflects these skills.  

Overall, I like the way that Swish Theory’s own Matt Powers described Gradey Dick: “he will be your team’s best shooter, and not your worst defender, maybe not even second worst.” Lights out wing shooters who move well off the ball and make quick decisions are ideal complementary players on offense. That describes Gradey perfectly. The hope is that Gradey finds a role defensively that can utilize his strengths and minimize his weaknesses. If that can happen, I see Gradey starting in many high-stakes games in the future. 

Tier 3.5 – The Thompson Twins

10. Ausar Thompson, Wing, Overtime Elite

11. Amen Thompson, Guard, Overtime Elite

I said most of what I want to say about the Thompson twins in my draft strategy article, so I’ll include the relevant text here. 

Amen and Ausar Thompson are perhaps the toughest evaluations I have had in my time scouting NBA Draft prospects. After all, before we even get into the Thompsons as players, there is the league that the Thompsons play in: Overtime Elite. Overtime Elite is an enigma to say the least, as we don’t really have an idea of how players translate to the NBA from that league. Last year, Dom Barlow and Jean Montero both went undrafted. Barlow played some garbage time minutes for the Spurs and was introduced into the rotation when the ultimately successful tank for Wemby was fully on. He does have some functional athleticism to his game and could maybe turn into something. But, that remains to be seen. He’s certainly not someone I want to project the Thompsons based on. 

The other guy, Jean Montero, is actually doing quite well in the Spanish ACB. He’s averaging 17/3/4 on 54% true shooting for Real Betis. It’s possible that he’s able to come over and contribute as a backup point guard for an NBA team someday. I had Montero 40th on my board last year, so I definitely think there is some talent there. But again, hardly a needle-moving development case, at least right now. Thus, I simply do not feel comfortable with the amount of data points that we have to properly project talent from Overtime Elite into the NBA.

Then, there is the actual evaluation of the Thompson twins. They were the best of the bunch in Overtime Elite, no doubt about it. But once again, we really have no idea how that dominance is going to project to the NBA. Another one of the best players in Overtime Elite, Jazian Gortman, was invited to the NBA combine, where he did not pop in any meaningful way. Scouts are projecting here, and most are erring on the side of optimism. However, I think using a top five pick on one of the Thompsons is an extremely dicey proposition. They are quite old, as both will comfortably be 20 on draft day. At roughly the same age, Brandon Miller was a first team All-American and arguably the best perimeter player in college basketball. Looking at things in those terms, I think you could argue the Thompsons should have been a bit more dominant to earn a high spot on draft boards. I THINK. Again, I don’t know. Nobody really knows. I fully see the vision for them being good NBA players. They flash a combination of elite athleticism and passing ability that we don’t see too often. They seem like wonderful people as well with strong work ethic and maturity. But, the level of competition factor is a bit too much of a hurdle for me. 

I have also mentioned some one and done prospects who fit exactly what I am looking for in the lottery. Wemby and Scoot are obvious. But, Cam Whitmore, Jarace Walker, Brandon Miller, Taylor Hendricks, Leonard Miller, Cason Wallace, and Gradey Dick are all surefire NBA guys to me whose avenues to strong positive contribution are very attainable. Once all those guys are off the board, that’s probably when I would roll the dice on the Thompsons. The reality is that both twins will be taken before several of the guys I mentioned above, and because of that I’ll take the safer guys who also have plenty of avenues to upside. 

I recognize that this is a controversial take, so I want to say that this is only one man’s strategy, and that yours might look quite different, and that’s okay. For those who would prioritize a Thompson twin in the draft, I will say that Ausar seems like the one to target. Amen seems to be the preferred twin, but Ausar was better statistically pretty much across the board (assists, steals, blocks, impact metrics, usage, turnovers, etc.). Name a statistic; chances are Ausar came out on top. Plus, Ausar is further along as a ball handler and shooter, which bodes well for his development. Amen is projected to go top five, and rumor has it Ausar is projected to fall a bit. So the smarter move to me is to get Ausar further down the board. 

I hope I’m not being flippant by putting the Thompson twins down here and discussing them as a group. That is not my intention. This is truly how I see them stacking up in this class. Putting myself in the general managers shoes, I really like the talent that I have in spots 1-9 enough to value them over the competition-driven uncertainty that the Thompsons have are surrounding them. They both could very well be amazing and that honestly wouldn’t surprise me. However, there are enough risks that make me wary of putting them higher on my board. This is where I will roll the dice.

Tier 4

12. Kobe Bufkin, Guard, Michigan

We’re starting Tier 4 off with Kobe Bufkin, who is like diet Cason Wallace in some ways. Painting with a broad brush, they’re both likely 3&D guards who have upside to become more than that. Bufkin has more to do than Wallace in order to hit his high end outcomes. Thus, he slots in a tier below Wallace. However, he’s a great player and projects to be a solid starting guard. 

Bufkin has a September 2003 birthday, which puts him around a lot of the one-and-dones in this class. Despite his thin 6’4, 175 pound frame, Bufkin was one of the better rim finishers in the class. He converted a borderline elite 64 unassisted shots at the rim, per HoopMath. Bufkin also projects to shoot. He shot 35.5 percent from three on 6.4 attempts per 100 and 84.9 percent from the line. These numbers are good on their own, but they’re much better when you see how improved they are compared to Bufkin’s freshman year. He only had a 22.2 3P% on similar per possession volume, albeit in a small sample. I always love to see big freshman to sophomore year shooting jumps from guards. Bufkin’s floater and off the dribble game will be a weapon for him as well.   

The question is whether or not Bufkin is a point guard at the next level. He only averaged 5.1 assists per 100, low for a typical point guard prospect, and he doesn’t have the first step quickness that would allow him to develop his passing faster. However, Bufkin does flash some high level passes. He’d certainly have more assists if he was allowed to play point guard full time. Bufkin can manipulate defenders well and deliver quick passes off a live dribble. As he fills out his frame, expect Bufkin to get a lot better as a passer. 

What gives Bufkin a bit more upside than some other guards down the board is the defense. Both his STL% and BLK% were > 2, which you don’t see too often from 6’4 guards. The shot blocking in particular really surprised me. Bufkin has no fear of getting up and contesting shots at the rim. That willingness to play above his size makes me think Bufkin is more ready to withstand the physicality of the NBA than his frame would otherwise suggest. It also helps that Bufkin stays in front of his man on the ball, navigates screens, and uses his quick hands to force steals. 

Overall, I’m hard-pressed to find a glaring flaw in Bufkin’s game. When an NBA strength program takes care of filling out his frame, the shooting, solid passing, and great defense will make Bufkin a good 3&D guard. As I said before, there’s upside here too. But, you’re betting that Bufkin a) is a true point guard and b) becomes a substantially better functional athlete inside the arc for him to get there. For now, I’m penciling him in as an uber-solid starting guard down the line. 

13. Sidy Cissoko, Wing, G-League Ignite

We’ve officially entered gamble territory, folks. Cissoko has a wide range of outcomes that include not sticking around the NBA and being a championship-quality role player. Once again, I’ll draw from my draft strategy article: 

In most of my public work, I make sure to mention the checklist for the ideal draft prospect, courtesy of the original Stepien group: a 6’6+ player who can dribble, pass, shoot, make decisions, and defend. As a 6’7 wing with an April 2004 birthday, Cissoko reliably demonstrated every single skill in that list except shooting, and I don’t think it’s crazy to project him as a shooter either. 30 percent from three and 64.5 percent from the line does not initially induce optimism. But, closer inspection leads me to believe that Cissoko is going to shoot. The mechanics themselves look a lot more fluid than you would guess, and he even had some cogent flashes of versatile shotmaking in the midrange and from three. When I watch him shoot off movement and hit stepbacks, I can’t help but believe those flashes are going to become more consistent.

The reason why the list of traits mentioned above are often mentioned in the context of star prospects. But, such players often become some of the best role players in the league too. To me, this is Cissoko’s path to success. He is an excellent passer, and even has some live dribble stuff in his arsenal. Cissoko’s AST:TO ratio near two reflects his exceptional feel. He also has a functional handle, and defends wings at a high level. By the way, Cissoko averaged 3.2 stocks per 100 as an 18 year old in the G-League. His non-scoring production (the stuff that tends to matter more anyway) is elite given his age and competition level. 

I know this is one of the more overused comparisons ever, but there’s some Kyle Anderson to Cissoko’s game. Cissoko has some underrated athletic ability, but both are slower high-feel wings who just get stuff done. If Cissoko even shoots passably, he’ll be a huge steal in this draft. 

14. Jett Howard, Wing, Michigan

Jett Howard is a 6’8 wing that can really shoot the ball, having shot 36.8 percent from three on a whopping 13.6 attempts per 100. He also shot an even 80 percent from the line. You do not have to worry about the shooting at the next level. 6’8 wing who can shoot might have you picturing a typical 3&D wing, but we have to seriously worry about the defense component of that formula. 

Howard’s rates of rebounds (8.9 DRB%, 1.0 ORB%), steals (0.8 STL%) are historically low for a wing. If you search for wings of the past who were this bad in these effort-indicating stats, the list is not promising. When you watch Howard play, you can see why these stats were so low. He doesn’t make a lot happen as a team defender, and he gets cooked way too often on the ball. There isn’t really a position or type of athlete that he excels at defending, which is almost unheard of for his size. Howard has serious work to do as a defender, or else he’ll be a serious negative in the NBA. Plenty of people have faded Howard all the way to the 20s or even 30s on their board because of the defense, and I definitely understand why. 

But, we also can’t ignore Howard’s enticing dribble, pass, shoot skill set at 6’8. He has legit prowess off the dribble. He uses ball screens well and makes teams pay when they go under. The mechanics are perfect on every shot type too. I also like how he uses his handle to get to his midrange pull up. I’d like to see him get to the rim a lot more than he does, and I think that he has the handle and stride length to up his game there. Howard is also a good passer. His 1.59 AST:TO ratio is great for a 6’8 wing, and he has enough connective passing skill to function well in an NBA offense. 

Howard is a fascinating mix of enticing strengths and potentially debilitating weaknesses. There are a lot of different ways that his career could go. But, at the end of the day, I have to value a 6’8 wing with a dribble, pass, shoot skillset. Those players don’t grow on trees. If an NBA team can make Howard passable on defense, we’re talking about a really valuable player.

15. Keyonte George, Guard, Baylor

I was really high on Keyonte at the start of the season, and at one point he was fourth on my board before I really dove deep into other prospects. As you can see, I’ve soured on Keyonte quite a bit since then. If everything comes together, I still believe Keyonte can be a great scorer. But, I started to question if the juice was worth the squeeze with Keyonte. He isn’t a true point guard, so he falls into an NBA archetype that’s rife with pitfalls: scoring combo guards. Unless these players can contribute on offense, their impact is usually negligible. There are notably few who have been an integral part of deep playoff runs, as successful teams usually have a bunch of 6’6+ two-way players with perimeter skill contributing to their rotation instead. But, there’s a chance Keyonte makes it all work.

As I’ve said, he’s got the tools to be a great scorer in the league. His off the dribble game looks like it’ll translate, as he creates a ton of space on such shots and has good touch (79.3 FT%). HoopMath charted 28 made unassisted two point jumpers, and an absurd 29 unassisted threes. I’m fine with the low conversion rate of these shots for Keyonte, as volume and touch matter considerably more for freshman prospects. The 2023 guard class is generally poor at getting to the rim, and Keyonte is no different. Only 14.6 of his shots came at the rim, per HoopMath, and 3 dunks on the season doesn’t help Keyonte’s case as a downhill athlete. And yet, Keyonte shot 9.4 FTA per 100 compared to 11.5 2PA. A FTA:2PA ratio above 0.8 is quite rare, but it’s a threshold that many of the best players in the world hit in college. 

Passing-wise, Keyonte has some great flashes of advanced reads, but his sky-high turnover rate of 5.9 per 100 needs to be lowered significantly for a team to feel good about letting Keyonte run a second unit at some point. It’s far more likely that Keyonte has some secondary playmaking responsibilities, but that will come further down the road. 

Defensively, Keyonte competes, and I thought his on-ball defense in particular looked quite good at times. The concern is about whether Keyonte’s athletic ability will translate up a level to quicker NBA guards and wings. If it does, Keyonte might actually have some upside that puts this ranking to shame. If you squint, you can see a CJ McCollum type player here. Unfortunately, the far more likely outcome is that Keyonte becomes a score-only guard who you have to overpay to retain past his rookie deal. That puts him just outside the lottery. 

16. Anthony Black, Guard, Arkansas

Anthony Black is nearly universally loved on draft Twitter and clearly in NBA circles too. Some have Black as high as fourth on their draft boards. It’s not like I don’t see the appeal. Black is 6’6, really athletic off of two feet, slides with ball handlers well on defense, and can pass on offense. His 3.2 STL% and 1.8 BLK% are great numbers for a freshman, as is a whopping 0.578 FTr. However, Black strikes me as a classic jack of all trades, master of none connector prospect that we tend to overrate.

Black likely isn’t a primary ball handler in the NBA, as his rim pressure off the dribble is iffy, and he’s a virtual non-factor shooting off the dribble. Thus, Black likely needs to shoot in order to be a positive NBA player. I’m not sure I trust Black’s jumper enough to bet on the “if he shoots” outcome. His 30.1 3P% and 70.5 FT% aren’t great, and I really don’t trust the touch and mechanics. There’s a chance that teams are content ignoring Black when he’s spotting up for three. When Black is running the offense, teams will try to under him to death until he proves that won’t be a viable strategy. 

I’m sure Black will provide some value as a playmaker, and he has a good chance of being a positive defender in the NBA. But, we have to account for the possibility that Black’s offensive role will be a secondary creator who can’t shoot. Are we sure that his passing is good enough to really hurt defenses if that’s his role? I’m not. I am always willing to bet on smart, defensive-oriented wing sized players with pedigree going back to high school, but there are red flags aplenty here. Thus, the middle of the first round feels right for Black. 

17. Dereck Lively II, Big, Duke

Lively is a traditional center who averaged 5.2 points per game last season at Duke. You read that right. 5.2 PPG. So, we’re not off to a good start here. But, the rest of Lively’s profile mirrors that of many successful bigs in the NBA. Lively blocked 7.2 shots per 100 possessions, corralled offensive rebounds better than anyone in this class (12.4 OREB%), and had a positive AST:TO ratio, having averaged 3.2 assists per 100 to just 2.0 turnovers, a remarkably low number for a big man. Of course, the low turnover numbers were helped by the fact that Lively’s usage on offense was exclusively rim running and offensive rebounds. But, it’s better to have those numbers than not have them!

I want to circle back to the absurd 7.2 blocks per 100. As crazy as it sounds, that might actually be underrating Lively’s rim protection abilities. As the season went on, Lively began to have a Rudy Gobert-esque effect on drivers. Players were terrified to even shoot at the rim when Lively was parked in the paint. Combine that with some hip fluidity and lateral mobility, Lively has legit DPOY upside in his high-end outcomes. 

Additionally, reports from Lively’s pro day said that Lively was making corner threes with ease. The mechanics actually looked pretty good at Duke, so we have to account for an outside chance that Lively becomes a pick and pop threat. If he does, 17 will be wayyyy too low for Lively.

Lively probably ends up being selected in the lottery tomorrow, but I can’t quite get there. I tend to fade traditional centers on my board anyway, and the complete lack of a scoring game scares me on offense. I value the film that I saw of Lively (and one game in person against UVA where he got played off the floor offensively) over pro day reports and workout videos. I don’t want to bank on DPOY upside for a lottery ranking either. If Lively is a positive defender but not an All-Defense guy, that becomes a less enticing proposition. 

18. Colby Jones, Guard, Xavier

Colby Jones is one of my favorites in this class. He’s a 6’5, 200 pound guard who is kind of good at everything. He’s young for a junior, as he only just turned 21, and his per 100 statline is a thing of beauty: 24.5 points, 9.4 rebounds, 7.2 assists (to 3.8 turnovers), 2.1 steals, and 0.9 blocks. Jones also shot 56.3 percent on twos and 37.8 percent from three. 

The jump shot is not a sure thing, as Jones had a career-low 65.8 FT% this past season. However, the mechanics look good off the catch. I trust Jones to drain catch and shoot jumpers in the NBA. If he can do that, there’s an important role for him on offense due to his passing. Jones initiated a lot of offense at Xavier, and he involved his teammates at a high rate. Jones actually eclipsed the AST%:USG% ratio > 1 threshold I discussed earlier with Cason Wallace. 

 Jones projects to hold his own defensively too. He averaged 2.4 steals per 100 for his career at Xavier, and his technique getting into ball handlers and navigating screens is excellent. Off the ball, Jones is keenly aware of man and ball, and his rotations are on-time and disruptive. His smarts and effort on that end should earn him playing time early in his career. 

Athletic concerns and worries about Jones’ jump shot likely drop him into the late first or early second round. But, I love Jones in the top 20. I believe he will shoot, and he’s too smart of a passer and defender to not contribute in the NBA for a while. 

19. Brandin Podziemski, Guard, Santa Clara

Brandin “Air Podz” Podziemski is another fun prospect that teams should be considering starting around pick 15. Athleticism is the obvious concern with Podz. It’s possible that he’s just Nik Stauskas, who was an excellent high-feel shooter in college. He just didn’t meet the athletic threshold required to stick around the NBA. Now that we’ve acknowledged the potential downside, allow me to start gushing about Podz. 

Let’s start with the per 100 stats, an absurd average of 31 points, 13.7 rebounds, 5.7 assists, 2.8 steals, and 0.7 blocks. Podz also shot 43.8 percent from three on 9.0 attempts per 100 and posted an elite 10.7 BPM. For someone with athletic concerns, those steal and rebound rates are really impressive. For me, those numbers reflect Podz’s incredible mind for the game. As I said in my draft strategy article, Podz is so damn smart he’s going to figure out how to contribute one way or another. 

Defensively, Podz will have to be hidden off the ball. He regularly got cooked on the ball, a problem that will only get worse in the NBA. But, as a team defender, Podz competes hard and disrupts much more than you’d expect him to. He makes timely rotations, opportunistically digs down to force steals, and fights through screens to the best of his ability. One thing is for sure: effort won’t hold Podz back on defense. On offense, Podz will continue to shoot the lights out and make high level passing reads as a secondary creator, a la Luke Kennard. His handle should translate enough to snake his way into the lane and hit floaters too, which accounted for many of his 50 unassisted two point makes. 

Like I said, Podziemski has plenty of downside rooted in the fact he might get matchup hunted to death on defense. But, you have to bet on production and impact to the degree Podz has it at a certain point on the board. 

20. Dariq Whitehead, Wing, Duke

Whitehead is an interesting bet, as his role at Duke was pretty much exclusively to knock down catch and shoot threes. He was certainly up for the task, as he shot 42.9 percent from three on 10.4 attempts per 100. The added layers of intrigue with Whitehead come from his high school pedigree (#1 RSCI), and the fact that he doesn’t turn 19 until August 1st. Whitehead was far too turnover prone for his role at 4.1 per 100, and he didn’t do much in the way of advantage creation either. But, a super young 6’6 wing who can shoot? That’s a pretty good starting point. A 2.2 STL% is nothing to sneeze at either. 

The flip side with Whitehead is that he’s completely inept when he walks inside the three point line at this stage of his career. He actually shot worse from two than he did from three, posting an abysmal 41.4 2P%. Another looming issue with Whitehead is the medical situation. Whitehead dealt with a foot injury all of this season, which took away a lot of the athletic ability he showed in high school. Had he been healthy, there’s a chance Whitehead could have shown much more inside the arc. It’s worth noting that he had a second surgery on his foot after the season ended, so I have a hard time making an upside bet on Whitehead predicated on regaining his athleticism. 

Overall, the combination of wing size, youth, pedigree, and shooting will always be intriguing. But, there’s a chance Whitehead has a tough time developing despite those valuable traits. He’s a tough one to pin down. 

21. Bilal Coulibaly, Wing, Metropolitans 92

No prospect experienced a meteoric rise quite like Victor Wembanyama’s teammate Bilal Coulibaly. He went from playing in the French second division to starting alongside Wemby in the French League finals. He wasn’t just ball-watching out there either. Mets 92 trusted Coulibaly to run some pick and roll in this critical setting. The degree of development within the year is unbelievable. The question is: was it enough to make Coulibaly a top prospect? 

The NBA seems to think so, as Coulibaly is unlikely to fall out of the lottery. I have been a little more reserved when moving him up my board. The good with Coulibaly is that he’s 6’8 with a 7’2 wingspan and young, with a July 2004 birthday. He also really fights on defense. I love his ability to navigate screens and stick with ball handlers. The potential to be a menace on the ball is absolutely there. 

Offensively, Coulibaly can handle the ball a bit and his decision making is trending in the right direction. Some have cited Coulibaly’s physical tools as a reason to believe he will develop into a borderline All-Star level creator. Basically, a compounding skills type of proposition. While Coulibaly has some juice, I certainly don’t think it’s on that level. I also don’t trust Coulibaly’s shot. In particular, the touch worries me. He only shot 62.7% from the line, and he had some ugly misses on his pull up, a shot he would need if he’s a creator bet. 

Overall, my instinct is that Coulibaly tops out as an energy wing at the next level. But, if Coulibaly keeps developing at this rate, he could really burn me for ranking him this low. I guess we’ll see.  

22. Brice Sensabaugh, Wing, Ohio St.

As a 6’6, 235 pound freshman, Brice averaged 40.3 points per 100 on an efficient 58.7 TS%. Surely we’re all overthinking this and he should be a consensus top five pick. Well, not so fast. 

While he’s got unbelievable touch, I’m concerned Brice’s athleticism isn’t conducive to being an effective on-ball scorer in the NBA. He isn’t very explosive, and I think he looks stiff in his movement patterns. Normally, we talk about prospects filling out their frame when discussing potential improvements to their functional athleticism. Brice is the opposite. He needs to slim down and gain some quickness and fluidity. 

That stiff movement also affects Brice on defense, where he is a clear negative. I actually question whether or not Brice will play NBA minutes in his first season because of his defense; it’s that bad. His 1.3 STL% and 1.7 BLK% are unremarkable for a wing, and Brice is completely lost as a team defender at this point. He also averaged a staggering 6.7 fouls per 100. Brice’s passing also leaves a lot to be desired. He shows some flashes, but almost two turnovers for every assist tells you all you need to know for the current state of affairs.  

On a much more positive note, Brice has a case for the best shooter in the draft. He shot 40.5% from three on high volume, as well as 83 percent from the line. If nothing else, he’ll provide a lights out stroke from deep. But, it’s likely he’ll provide more than that on offense. You don’t reach the scoring heights Brice did unless you have some tricks up your sleeve. He mastered isolation scoring at the college level, and has one of the best midrange pull ups I’ve seen from a draft prospect. 

Basketball games are won by one team putting the ball through the net more times than their opponent. Brice does that at an elite level. But, the questions about literally everything else keep him outside my top 20. 

Tier 5

At this point in the draft, there are two main types of bets you can make. You can draft someone whose right tail outcome isn’t all that inspiring, but they have a high chance of being a quality rotation player. Conversely, you can swing for the fences on someone who clearly isn’t ready, but there’s just enough to build on such that you might have a decent player down the road. It’s tough to rank these two types alongside each other, so my solution is to split Tier 5 into a few groups, some of which contain safer players and others more risky ones. 

Tier 5a – Preferred Rotation Bets

23. Marcus Sasser, Guard, Houston

If you watched the playoffs this year, you know that successful teams often have 3&D guards start alongside jumbo creators. Sasser projects to fill this role perfectly. He’s a bit short at 6’1, but he has a sturdy 195 pound frame. He uses every ounce of strength he has to bother guys at the point of attack. A 3.2 STL% shows how disruptive Sasser can be. Then there’s the shooting. Sasser shot 38.4% from three on 13.9 attempts per 100 and 84.8% from the line. Sasser has a prolific midrange pull up game he can use too, should defenders run him off the line. Sasser won’t be running pick and roll every possession for you, but his 1.94 shows that you can rely on him to make quality decisions within the flow of the offense. It’s easy to picture Sasser helping a playoff team and playing a decade in the NBA. He’d be a great option for a contender. 

24. Jaime Jaquez Jr., Wing, UCLA

Jaime Jaquez is an older 6’6 wing who is far from a sure thing to shoot. That’s a shaky foundation, but Jaquez has just about everything else you could ask for. He filled up the box score, having averaged 31.9 points, 14.7 rebounds, 4.2 assists, 2.8 steals, and 1.1 blocks per 100. It might not surprise you to know that Jaquez also had a 10.7 BPM. Additionally, Jaquez just has a knack for making the right play. He had a super low 9.9 TOV%, and he is great at putting his teammates in positions to succeed. I like Jaquez’s anticipation as a team defender too. Jaquez also fits brilliantly with any team because of his motor. He’s always diving for loose balls, crashing the glass, and intensely guarding ball handlers. Jaquez is simply a tone setter who will enhance his team on the court as well as in the locker room. If the rumor is true that Miami is locked in on Jaime at 18, I can’t imagine a better fit. 

25. Jordan Hawkins, Guard, UConn

Prospects who play for the national champs have been overrated in the past because they’re labeled as winners. Sometimes the shoe fits, but more often than not scouts anchor that one player to the accomplishments of an entire team. I’m worried that’s what some are doing with Hawkins. That said, this is the best shooter in the draft. His mechanics are picture-perfect and the speed of his release is Klay Thompson-esque. You might want to sit down for these numbers: 38.8 3P% on 15.1 attempts per 100 and an 88.7 FT%. Hawkins isn’t higher on my board because I don’t trust him to do much else at an NBA level. I see Isaiah Joe as a reasonable outcome if Hawkins gets better at weaponizing his gravity to create for others and improves as a team defender. If he’s just a pure shooting specialist, Hawkins could run into some issues deep in the playoffs. But, when the shooting is THIS good, it’s hard to pass on.

Tier 5b – Preferred Raw Prospect Gambles

26. Maxwell Lewis, Wing, Pepperdine 

No prospect has had more of a roller coaster ride on my board this year than Maxwell Lewis. At one point, I was all in. I saw the potential wing shot creator with functional length on defense and budding playmaking. I even wrote about Lewis during the preseason, anticipating that he would be a top 20 guy for me this cycle. Unfortunately, while all the enticing tools were still on display, another year went by where Lewis didn’t put it together. The propensity for turnovers from his freshman year carried over, as he averaged 4.2 of them per 100. But, the real worries come on defense. Lewis has always had incredibly slow hips, which make it impossible to contain ball handlers. But, I had some optimism about him as a team defender. That optimism waned when Lewis’ steal rate dropped to an abysmal 1.1 per 100. To make matters worse, Lewis is older than you’d like for a prospect this raw – he’ll be 21 on NBA opening day. There’s enough to work with that I’ll hold out a little hope that everything comes together and Lewis becomes a two-way shot creating wing. But, he has a long way to go. 

27. Julian Phillips, Forward, Tennessee

People are sleeping on this guy quite a bit! I didn’t really register how good of an athlete Phillips is until the combine when he killed it on the vertical jump. I didn’t pay too much attention to Phillips during the season because I thought of him as a multi-year guy. But, I dove deeper after the combine, and I think we’ve got a fascinating development case to monitor here. An uber-athletic 6’8 wing who got fouled as much as he did (0.615 FTr) and was an advanced defender for a freshman deserves consideration. The shot isn’t as hopeless as his 23.9 3P% suggests either. Phillips shot 82.2 percent from the line last year. Going back a couple years, he shot an eye-opening 37 percent from three in high school and AAU play. Phillips could be a 3&D wing hiding in plain sight, he just needs a patient development staff. 

28. Noah Clowney, Forward, Alabama

Clowney is a tough one because the long term vision for him is to be a stretch four, yet he can’t shoot right now. He only shot 28.3 percent from three and 64.9 percent from the line. The mechanics give people (including me) some hope, though. Clowney shoots a smooth, comfortable ball, and he’s young enough (July 2004 birthday) that the results have time to catch up to the eye test. Even though he’s skinny, Clowney is already a great functional athlete. His gaudy 66.9 2P% and 17.2 rebounds per 100 reflect that. All-in-one metrics love Clowney as well. He posted a 8.3 BPM, and he frequently ranks highly in draft models. Clowney likely needs time in the G-League, but I’ll always approve of betting on functional athleticism and the potential of perimeter skill. 

Tier 5c – Next Rotation Guys Up 

29. Jalen Slawson, Wing, Furman

Yup, I’ve got a 23 year old wing from Furman in my top 30. Talk to the hand. In all seriousness, Slawson is someone I’ve liked since his junior year. His statistical profile is a thing of beauty. At 6’7, 210 pounds, He shot 62.6% from two, 39.4% from three, had a 19.9 AST%, 2.9 STL%, and 5.3 BLK%. Insane. Slawson has always been incredibly smart. He was an elite event creator on defense every year at Furman, and he’s an excellent passer capable of dicing up defenses from the high post and the top of the key. Slawson’s age means he needs to contribute quickly in order to stick in the league, and I’m confident he’ll do just that. What team can’t use a wing who wreaks havoc on defense, makes smart decisions, and can knock down an open shot? There’s no guarantee that Slawson can hang athletically in the NBA. If there was, he’d be much higher on my board. But, I’m betting Slawson will tighten the bolts and improve just as he’s done every year of his career. If Slawson goes undrafted, it would be an absolute steal. 

30. Trayce Jackson-Davis, Big, Indiana

In my draft strategy article, I talked about how Trayce Jackson-Davis is my kind of big man bet in the second round. The bigs who buck the trend of being played off the floor in the playoffs have high positional feel and/or ball screen coverage versatility. Oftentimes, big prospects who fit this mold are available in the second round. Xavier Tillman was that guy in 2021, and Jaylin Williams was in 2022. I had a top 20 grade on Tillman and a top 25 grade on Williams, and both have turned into quality NBA centers. Jackson-Davis falls here to 30 because he’s not super tall and isn’t nearly as switchable as Tillman and Williams. 

His scoring game isn’t super exciting and will exclusively revolve around rim running and getting putbacks. It helps that Jackson-Davis is a great rebounder. But, Jackson-Davis really sets himself apart with his passing. His 24.8 AST% is better than most of the guard prospects in this draft! I love the laser beams Jackson-Davis throws to open shooters out of the post. His quick decision making in the short roll will be an asset too. Defensively, Jackson-Davis has more mobility than he gets credit for. He’ll be system-dependent in the NBA – if you can get him to be a help defender rather than the primary rim protector on defense, good things will happen. It’s not a sexy pick, but Jackson-Davis has a good chance to contribute for a while. 

31. Ben Sheppard, Wing, Belmont

Sheppard is another guy I’ll admit to not taking super seriously until after the combine. Sheppard killed it in the second combine scrimmage, where he showed how helpful his shooting and feel can be for a team. Sheppard shot 41.5 percent from three this past season on 10.2 attempts per 100. The shot itself looks good, and he can get it off in a variety of different movement situations. What’s perplexing about Sheppard’s shooting is the 69.6 FT% for his career. There’s a tug of war between the production from three and the touch indicator at the line, but I trust what I’m seeing in the shot. Sheppard also had an AST:TO ratio comfortably over one and a solid 2.3 STL% to round out his role player profile. Sheppard’s athleticism will be tested on defense in the NBA. He needs to get much stronger, but his anticipation and motor will help him contribute defensively as his frame fills out. Sheppard doesn’t have a lot of upside, but he’s got a good chance to contribute to a rotation within the next couple years.  

32. Kobe Brown, Forward, Missouri

As a 6’7, 250 pound power forward, Kobe Brown scored in volume (30.1 points per 100), was an excellent processor and passer (4.9 assists per 100 to 3.2 turnovers), and defended cerebrally (career 2.5 STL% and 2.4 BLK%). Brown has the size and skill combination to contribute for a long time in the NBA. The lynchpin with Brown is the shot. He had a virtually unprecedented improvement in his 3P%, from 20.6% his junior year to 45.5% last year. His shot looks good, but betting on a one year sample of great shooting from an upperclassman has burned scouts in the past. So, I’m proceeding with caution here. If Brown does shoot, he could be used as an effective stretch four or small-ball five given his strong frame.  

33. Kris Murray, Wing, Iowa

Kris Murray’s twin is Keegan Murray, last year’s fourth overall pick by the Kings. It’s possible that Kris is being mocked in the first based on his relation to Keegan. Personally, I don’t get it with Kris. The shot is far from a guarantee (career 69.9 FT%), and he didn’t stand out in any particular way as a defender. The low turnover rate is nice to see for a wing, but I usually want to see low turnovers in conjunction with a projectable jumper. Kris will also be 23 on opening day. So, if he’s going to iron out the jumper or get better on defense, it needs to happen soon. Murray slots in here because I have to account for the possibility that the jumper is real. A 6’8 wing who can shoot likely sticks around for a while. But, teams shouldn’t draft Kris Murray thinking that they’re getting Keegan.  

Tier 5d – A Couple More Decent Gambles 

34. James Nnaji, Big, Barcelona

As an 18 year old, Nnaji earned minutes for a Barcelona team littered with former NBA players. That’s intriguing enough on its own. Then there’s the physical tools: 7’0 tall, 7’7 wingspan, a chiseled 250 pound frame, a functional vertical, and surprisingly decent mobility. Nnaji used that athleticism to become one of the better shot blockers in the Spanish ACB, posting a 6.4 BLK%. Perhaps more impressively, the BLK% jumped up to 8.2 in his 19 Euroleague games. Offensively, Nnaji will be exclusively used as a rim runner. He doesn’t have a prayer to shoot, and he won’t be trusted to make passing reads. But, Nnaji is a massive lob threat, and I trust that he’ll get some easy buckets because of that. As a stash option, I don’t mind it if a team drafts Nnaji to see where his physical tools can take him. He’s on a great development trajectory, so there could really be something here. 

35. Amari Bailey, Guard, UCLA

There are plenty of reasons not to consider Bailey. His low three point volume and FT% have me skeptical about his shot. Bailey also averaged 5.4 turnovers per 100, dreadful for a non-initiator. But, Bailey is fairly athletic, and I thought he showed some good stuff on defense. His 2.3 STL% and 3.3 DBPM are quite good for a freshman. I don’t like factoring the combine in too much, but Bailey looked much improved as a passer in the scrimmages. If Bailey can pass, defend, and continue to hone his jumper, he could become a rotation guy down the line. 

Tier 6 – The Rest

36. Julian Strawther, Wing, Gonzaga

37. Seth Lundy, Wing, Penn State

38. Jalen Hood-Schifino, Guard, Indiana

39. Nick Smith Jr., Guard, Arkansas

40. GG Jackson, Forward, South Carolina

41. Hunter Tyson, Wing, Clemson

42. Jordan Walsh, Wing, Arkansas

43. Jordan Miller, Wing, Miami (FL)

44. Jalen Pickett, Guard, Penn State

45. Jaylen Clark, Guard, UCLA

46. Adama Sanogo, Big, UConn

47. D’Moi Hodge, Guard, Missouri

48. Craig Porter Jr., Guard, Wichita St

49. Toumani Camara, Wing, Dayton

50. Andre Jackson Jr., Wing, UConn

51. Olivier-Maxence Prosper, Wing, Marquette

52. Tristan Vukcevic, Big, KK Partizan

53. Terquavion Smith, Guard, NC State

54. Isaiah Wong, Guard, Miami (FL)

55. Ricky Council IV, Guard, Arkansas

56. Azuolas Tubelis, Big, Arizona

57. Mohamed Gueye, Forward, Washington St.

58. Landers Nolley III, Wing, Cincinnati

59. Mike Miles Jr., Guard, TCU

60. Jalen Wilson, Wing, Kansas

61. Rayan Rupert, Wing, NZ Breakers

62. Omari Moore, Guard, San Jose State

63. Justyn Mutts, Forward, Virginia Tech

64. Tosan Evbuomwam, Forward, Princeton

65. Chris Livingston, Wing, Kentucky

66. Liam Robbins, Big, Vanderbilt

67. Colin Castleton, Big, Florida

68. Kendric Davis, Guard, Memphis

69. Alex Fudge, Wing, Florida

70. Caleb McConnell, Wing, Rutgers

71. Sir’Jabari Rice, Wing, Texas

72. Taylor Funk, Forward, Utah St

73. Jacob Toppin, Forward, Kentucky

74. Charles Bediako, Big, Alabama

75. Deshawndre Washington, Wing, New Mexico St

76. Drew Timme, Big, Gonzaga

77. Oscar Tshiebwe, Big, Kentucky

78. Emoji Bates, Wing, Eastern Michigan

79. Mojave King, Guard, G-League Ignite

80. Leaky Black, Wing, UNC

The post Michael Neff’s 2023 Big Board appeared first on Swish Theory.

The Metrics

Todd Whitehead (@crumpledjumper on Twitter) and the people of Synergy Sports recently created a Synergy Shot Quality metric, measuring the quality of each and every shot. Through various components explained below, shots are compiled into a single score, ranging from high (>80th %tile of shot quality) to low (<20th %tile of shot quality). Swish Theory’s Tyler recently used this metric for a piece on shotmaking prospects Brandon Miller and Jett Howard, for example.

Along with the metric, Synergy has labeled each player with an offensive archetype that best resembles their playstyle/role, analyzing their usages and tendencies to develop 3 primarily roles: Ball Handlers, Wings, and Bigs, including sub-archetypes within each role. 

The Data

Coming back to the original topic of difficult shot-making, I wanted to see how college players in Swish Theory’s Top 40 Prospects stacked up in their frequency of low quality shots and the efficiency of these shots. The x-axis measures the share of each player’s field goal attempts categorized by Synergy as low quality looks, while the y-axis displays how well each player shot on those attempts.

The further to the right on this graph, the greater share of difficult attempts; the further up near the top, the better the shotmaking.

I divided the results by archetype as well to best compare each player relative to their own role. To add the finishing touch, I included multiple historical examples to see how some of the NBA’s best match up. 

The number one standout in this study is Jalen Hood-Schifino, terrorizing drop coverages with his mid-range prowess (sad Purdue noises) with the highest share of shots being difficult. While Nate Oats preaches the paint-and-three approach more than maybe any other coach, seeing Brandon Miller in the lower left corner is slightly concerning for hopes as a late shot-clock creator. Nick Smith Jr. had a messy freshman campaign battling injuries and consistent playing time, but his main sell circling around his tough shot-making spells some concerns as he lands at the bottom of this graph (albeit on limited volume compared to others).

If you look up a bit higher you can see ol’ Jalen Brunson hanging around on an island. His upper echelon functional strength, change of pace, and sweet footwork worked wonders in the trenches, and his outlier shot-making was one of the key indicators of his future success. 

Jarace Walker did not have an easy shot diet, especially for an athletic/defensive inclined big wing, but maintaining respectable efficiency in spite of that provides some hope of a higher-end offensive outcome. Brice Sensabaugh was made for this graph, and his elite in-between and pull-up game scorched the Big Ten. Mikal Bridges is an interesting case study, as he was rarely tasked with difficult shots in college, but showcased elite efficiency that has shown to pay dividends for his self-creation jump.

As we move to bigs, we see a massive increase in the quality of looks these bigs are getting, as the high-percentile shots right at the rim occur at a sizably higher rate than their counterparts. No surprise to see the rim-running Dereck Lively and Adem Bona slotted in the top left corner, with a combined mere 13 low-quality shot attempts between the two. Domantas Sabonis is the biggest outlier of any NBA player I’ve looked at, the soft touch + bruising strength steamrolled over the poor WCC. Taylor Hendricks and DaRon Holmes II are the only two bigs in this class with over 10% of their looks being difficult shots and above average efficiency with those shots, though one can be certain Victor Wembanyama would break this graph entirely.

Conclusion

While more research needs to be done to truly make an assessment whether these low quality metrics can stand as a predictor for self-creation/difficult shot-making, there is value in locating those flashes of outperformance. Whether it be in volume or efficiency, taking shots late in the shot-clock, off the dribble, in isolation or contested with some degree of success is a bright green flag for future NBA contributions.

It is worth a reminder that these are small samples by their nature, and may say as much about a prospect’s context as their performance. As well, taking a more difficult shot diet is neither a good or bad thing, but a means of the talent of a player and the needs of a team.

At the end of the day, you can look at these stats as glass half-empty or half-full: a player takes too many bad shots or it shows promise of higher usage at the next level. Or, a third option: lean into your inner hooper, shatter the glass on the floor, make some popcorn, and delight yourself to a BallDontStop highlight mix. Something we should all do a bit more.

The post The Pure Hooper Index appeared first on Swish Theory.

The sample for NBA draft prospects is tiny. Even if we have perfect data for a player’s prep and pro careers, the top draft prospects are typically aged 18-22, undergoing massive changes to their games and lives over the span of mere months, over and over in evolving environments and around new personnel.

Combing through that limited data, we search for narratives, precedents, guys that “just have it,” from a scout’s perspective.

In search for a method to the madness this cycle, I’m splitting my draft analysis pieces into three:

• “Whiteboard” Prospects: those whose stats improve as they play worse competition, declining, then, against the top teams
• “Green Flags Only” Prospects: those whose stats exceed certain thresholds regardless of level of competition
• Everyone Else

This, first of two pieces, looks at what I’m calling Whiteboard prospects. Their top-end traits are obvious, but for that reason can be prepared for by the better opponents. As I watch this group, I seek to answer two questions:

• Do they struggle against increasing competition in a way that would be a problem in the NBA?
• Do they simply dominate lower-ranked competition that much?

Definition

I defined Whiteboard Prospects as having a certain set of traits decline against good competition, increase against bad competition:

• Box Plus-Minus
• Percentage of teammates’ FGM assisted
• True shooting percentage
• Steal rate.

As long as these decline from all competition to games against top-100 teams, then again against top-50 teams, and are also on Swish Theory’s Big Board 1.0, they’re a Whiteboard Prospect.

Let’s get to it.

Brandin Podziemski, Santa Clara

• vs. all competition: 10.0 BPM
• vs. top 100 teams: 6.5 BPM
• vs. top 50 teams: 3.9 BPM

Podziemski I thought was going to be an easy read, especially given the severity of decline, the single largest from overall comp to top-50 in our sample. But it was far from that.

Against bad competition, “Podz” did everything. Shooting at a 66% effective field goal percentage and 28% usage, he also maintained a 25% assist rate, 21% defensive rebound rate and 3% steal rate. His stats were heavily buoyed by, simply, never missing from three, where he took over half his shots and made over half of those attempts. That is basically impossible to stop, especially if you are a team ranked in the 200-400 range.

Against better competition, the athletic limitations showed, as expected. He struggles to create much distance on his dribble moves, leading to forced tough angle floaters, but those still go in at decent rates. Truly, Podz put up a historically efficient scoring season.

Projecting that at the next level is tricky. 80-179 (45%) from three, 62-146 (42%) from midrange, 75-121 (62%) at the rim is tough to argue with, but 8-17 (47%) from three, 7-25 (28%) from midrange and 7-19 (37%) from close range is what he tallied against top-50 teams. Another reminder of the inherent uncertainty in percentages.

However, Podziemski is armed with a mighty weapon to limit this downgrade against better competition: he plays really hard, and processes the game very quickly. There is one type of game processing that is Chris Paul-like, setting up one play to set up the next, and then there is Podz’s sharklike approach, always advantage-seeking from all angles. He goes for the kill with his hit-ahead passes or finding cutters, which leads to some sloppy turnovers, but, when coupled with his nose for the ball, means Podziemski will pick up change wherever it comes loose.

Finally, his pull-up three is legit. The release is low, but he needs little room to get it off and has enough 1-2 release patterns to get there.

Results: Primary odds fade, but secondary and especially tertiary shine. He’ll find a way to contribute, I’m sure

Brandon Miller, Alabama

• vs. all competition: 11.0 BPM
• vs. top 100 teams: 9.9 BPM
• vs. top 50 teams: 6.5 BPM

We move from Brandin to Brandon, first to second largest decline in overall production as NCAA competition increases. This exercise was less kind to Alabama’s Miller, placed in a cushier position and, given he is a 6’9’’ ballhandler projected to go in the top 5, the light is naturally a bit harsher.

The obvious knock on Miller this season was his rim finishing. He shot 74% at the rim against teams ranked 50-400, an elite figure that fits a top scorer prospect. But only 44% at the rim against teams in the top 50, representing about half of his possessions. Considering Brandon is also old for a freshman, this is a bit concerning for a player with his level of touch and fluidity with the ball.

Miller’s drives tend to develop slowly. His handle is strong, as are his ball custodian instincts, making him a decent point forward option to kick off an offense with a pull-up threat. But, while he can create initial separation, he lacks the flexibility to lower his shoulder to turn angles to the rim or burst to hit those openings, and his vertical takes long to load. Both of these factors combine to mean forced difficult finishes, which he figured out to some extent but will remain a problem in the NBA.

Perhaps more concerning, however, was the defensive tape as competition increased. Alabama is full of rangy, athletic wings who can handle tough matchups. This allowed them to let Miller, with his team-leading usage, take easier assignments. One of the main consequences of going up in competition is stronger worst option, and this showed with Miller’s defense. The same lack of flexibility and burst that limits his finishing also make Miller a worse chaser from interior to perimeter. His help was often too conservative into the paint, with not enough burst to then close out effectively.

His long wingspan and overall solid instincts mediate this, but I would not be surprised if Miller would be targeted significantly in a playoff series in his prime. That may be an aggressive take, again considering his feel for the game is strong overall, but I think it is more representative of his ability than the current top 3 talk.

Miller has a lot to like, especially how good he is at locating shooters off the dribble while he probes for his shot, or how he gets set off the move into his three. But the overall state of his game reads more like a #10 pick than top 5.

Results: some rust to the star shine

Judah Mintz, Syracuse

• vs. all competition: 1.5
• vs. top 100 teams: -0.2
• vs. top 50 teams: -2.5

Judah Mintz has a space creation and space maintenance problem. His touch is legit, but opponents know it, and with limited volume from three point range for a guard, he can be predictable in how he gets into it.

Mintz is young and has time to build counters for this, as there are plenty, but I would not feel comfortable rolling him out on an NBA court next season until there is much more evidence of that. He shot 43% on 67 runners, a figure I’d be comfortable penciling in as Mintz’ floor for the shot type. The average degree of difficulty, particularly as competition ramped up, was sky high.

He has built his game around a shot that will always be available to him – tough floaters – but that is still unlikely to be very efficient offense on its own, particularly with a lack of strong acceleration. But, Mintz is also blessed with an advantage-seeking type of passing creativity. Not necessarily the best at setting up an offense, Mintz has a keen eye for brief moments of openings, and also how his shotmaking creates them.

That is a potent combination for a scorer, but the scoring needs more supports. The easiest solution, by far, is to up the three point volume. Judah took more midrange attempts (189) than any freshman with so few three point attempts (66). When factoring in his strong FTA and rim attempt counts, that puts him in the company of De’Aaron Fox and Tony Wroten as far as previous draft picks, Elfrid Payton when including sophomore seasons. Mintz’s burst is certainly closer to that of Payton than Fox or Wroten, and we saw what happened to Elfrid without credible three point volume.

Mintz shot 6 of 24 (25%) from catch and shoot and 11 of 35 (31%) from pull-up threes. Not great. He seems hamstrung by a lack of strength, a lanky build but time to add on. Adding core strength should be Judah’s priority #1, helping both with his burst and ability to launch when opponents go under on pick and roll.

Suffice it to say, Mintz has a strength issue on defense as well. He has good passing lane instincts, once again making up for his lack of consistent presence with timely high-value plays.

Mintz has a route to being a very potent scorer, but I think it would benefit him to spend either another year in college or significant time in NBA weight rooms to get there.

Results: Potential end of shotclock star, with a 1-2 year path to get there

Terrence Shannon Jr., Illinois

• vs. all competition: 6.1 BPM
• vs. top 100 teams: 5.1 BPM
• vs. top 50 teams: 2.1 BPM

I was a bit shocked the degree to which Shannon’s stats declined as competition increased, given his athletic profile and semblance of shotmaking, playmaking on both ends. But the tape revealed clear limitations to TSJ’s handle in particular that make me concerned for his ability to fit into an NBA team quickly.

Terrence Shannon Jr. is fast, perhaps the burstiest player in all of college basketball. That is an extremely, often underrated quality for an NBA player to have, one I just complained about lacking in Judah Mintz’ game currently. If you give the ball to TSJ as he gets downhill, he’s gonna get downhill. He can hit any straight line gap and keep the space with his strength. He will get open court NBA steals this way.

However, the cupboard is a bit bare when it comes to options for maximizing this advantage. In particular, Shannon is extremely left-handed, and with few handle counters beyond his pull-up if opponents sit on it. Another fortunate trait of Shannon’s, though, is his touch is indeed good. I’d bet he shoots among the best in the class for those with shortest load time into pull-up threes: a hand-tracked stopwatch estimate places him often around 0.4 seconds from plant to release, about a tenth of a second quicker than Mintz.

On defense as well, I hope for more from TSJ. I’ve long been a fan of his versatility as a big guard, but on this watch found myself having doubts on his ability to handle difficult matchups in the NBA. He knows how to be physical when engaged, but often floats near his mark and gives up space he shouldn’t. Perhaps with NBA-level training this can improve, but still disappointing for an upperclassman who could have been more of a stalwart for the Illini.

TSJ is a Whiteboard prospect, but likely shouldn’t be at this point in his career. He has had success with his pull-up (88th percentile) but at the cost of refining his catch and shoot mechanics (29th percentile), the latter of which will be more important for his life as an NBA role player. Without the star equity that a developed driving game (0.8ppp) would enable, his inconsistent presence on defense becomes a greater concern as well.

Results: NBA athlete, but the skills development has to continue

Maxwell Lewis, Pepperdine

• vs. all competition: 1.2
• vs. top 100: -2.2
• vs. top 50: -2.4

First of all, we have to address the baseline of production. That degree of negative box plus-minus – a box score measure meant to estimate plus-minus – is extremely concerning for a prospect mocked in the first round. I have wanted to believe in Max as even a lottery level prospect, as his tools are that enticing, particularly his stride length, length for position and shotmaking abilities. The combination of qualities he has is rare. Extremely rare. And a good star predictor too. But having 13 games against top 100 competition and only shooting an effective field goal percentage of 46% and turning the ball over at a 23% clip to 14% assist rate, only 1.3% steal rate despite those tools is a major red flag.

To my dismay, this showed up in the tape. To be fair to Lewis, he has not been in organized basketball for as long as many he faced and Pepperdine had many flaws in the roster. He often faced completely stacked defenses, so that when the shot clock dwindled, he would face endless help. But that is the archetype he will be expected to succeed in, and the numbers when under pressure (0 shooting fouls to 8 turnovers in late shot clock situations) showed up in the tape as he often stepped out of bounds when rushed.

But, man, he has such creativity in finding his shots I almost don’t want to care. When we write about Whiteboard prospects, this is exactly the prototype. I believe Lewis has as good of instincts as any his age at finding a gap to attack automatically as he drives, it’s just cleaning up the rough edges around that which need a lot of work.

The reward here is high, and tangible: Max can hit difficult shots with the best of them. But a team needs to be keenly aware of what to expect as far as his year one usage. He will be targeted on screens. He will turn the ball over if help takes him by surprise. But he’ll teleport across the floor with the ball before gracefully dropping it in, too.

Results: Whiteboard prospect embodied, elite shotmaker potential but little faith in being a consistent foundation piece without major improvements

Adem Bona, UCLA

• vs. all competition: 5.0 BPM
• vs. top 100 teams: 4.6 BPM
• vs. top 50 teams: 2.8 BPM

Bona is a bit surprising to be found on this list, by all accounts a solid rim protector who does his dirty work and doesn’t overextend elsewhere. That remained the case during my tape watch, but I see why his stats changed so much, as well.

A big factor is his role in UCLA’s system. They have elite wing defenders in Jamie Jacquez Jr. and Jaylen Clark to rack up stocks, and Tyger Campbell, while not imposing in size, is a ball demon to create transition offense. Against bad teams, adding Bona into the mix is simply not fair. UCLA rarely lets up clean paint touches against sub-100, even opponents in the 50-100 range. And when they do, Bona is ready to pounce.

Against the top 50 squads, where UCLA faces more of a challenge, Bona was used in many different ways. This is his genius: you can throw Bona in a full blitz, in a hedge, drop, man on the perimeter, helpside rotator, whatever, and he’ll be useful. Bona understands how to use his length, strength and speed as instruments in whatever task, an ability that will benefit playoff teams in particular with his defensive versatility.

There are cracks that form, however, particularly in his often overzealous rotations, throwing off the timing in sync with the team defense a bit, and I think his timing on blocks is more very good than top 1% among shotblockers. This can mean having to recover from distances longer than he needs, and not being quite able to pull it off. That can be developed, but does mean I could see him struggling a bit to kick off his NBA career even if playing even harder.

Then, there’s the offense. I struggle to see him ever been a true positive offensive player, but can make it work with constant screens and vigilance to look for lobs. His box outs are spectacular, as well, using his body to create space as well as anyone I’ve seen this draft cycle. However if he gets the ball and doesn’t know immediately what to do with it, things can get ugly, as he is simply not comfortable doing things beyond catch and finish.

With his special defensive versatility, he’ll find his way to NBA relevance at some point. Keeping things simple would help him fit neatly into a very valuable type of rim protector.

Result: NBA-ready rim protector, just needs to slow things down

Taylor Hendricks, UCF

• vs. all competition: 7.1 BPM
• vs. top 100 teams: 6.4 BPM
• vs. top 50 teams: 5.1 BPM

Being further down this list means “less dynamic,” or, most consistent across components, and that is exactly what I discovered in watching Hendricks’ tape. The primary trend being picked up, I believe, is that as a member of a #63-ranked team by barttorvik.com, UCF was a cuspy NCAA team that could take out lower ranks with ease but struggle against the top 20s.

An interesting phenomenon took me by surprise, though: as his teammates struggled increasingly against future professional basketball players, Hendricks’ uniqueness popped. After all, his 5.1 BPM against top 50 teams is still second best on this list so far.

Hendricks has two traits that will serve him very well early in his career. First, his shot has an automatically stabilizing quality to it, as if a string goes directly through his shot pocket. It is light into the loading and skies maximizing Hendricks’ seemingly over seven-foot wingspan. Second, he has unbelievable lateral movements combined with elite hand-eye placement on blocks or steals. Physically, I feel like he is one of the more underrated athleltes, even as he is considered universally a very good athlete. Behind Wemby, Scoot, Amen and Ausar, Hendricks provides instantaneous movements and blankets entire sections of the court.

His help rotations need some work, too often pinching in too far or struggling with the complexity of multiple screens, but seemed to do increasingly well as his responsibilities increased. He always plays hard and is ready to be challenged. He does not let up easy layups, as he has the tools to make plays at the rim from distance.

The biggest issue with Hendricks is his lack of any real craft inside on offense, defaulting to a quick jumper instead of trying to solve those problems. But mitigating that is that fact that, well, his quick jumpers are really good. He has displayed some passing creativity, if not consistent advantage creation, but also hunts drive angles and is able to get his body lower to the ground than you’d think to maximize angles.

I came into this watch considering Taylor Hendricks an easy top 20 but probably not top 10, certainly not top 8 prospect. Now I think he could finish top 5 in the class eventually, and his warts are maybe not as bad as those talked around him, given the flashes of sky-high upside.

Results: a top 10-worthy pick

Keyonte George, Baylor

• vs. all competition: 4.7
• vs. top 100 competition: 3.9
• vs. top 50 competition: 2.9

Keyonte George’s projection is complicated by unusual usage, often the third guard on Baylor parked in the slot. At IMG Academy he had more clearcut combo guard duties, where he had more priority in the offense to take advantage of above-the-break spacing. George, as well as upperclassmen Adam Flagler and LJ Cryer, took turns initiating, and with little interior threat, often had to do so within single possessions.

A more fluid offense will benefit George mightily at the next level, where his combination of skills is compelling. In particular, Keyonte has lightning quick processing off the catch, able to whip the ball to open teammates in a flash or rise into his smooth, technically sound release. That optionality, in addition to proficiency out of the pick and roll, where Synergy ranks him in the 81^st percentile on possessions that ended in his shots or passes, give him a valued skillset at the NBA level.

Where the tape turns against George, however, is placing his athleticism against NBA athletes, a major part of the story when his production drops against better competition. First, it’s simply easy to get Keyonte out of frame by targeting him on defense. At 6’4’’ and more SG than PG, Keyonte does not have the lateral quickness or length to contest after being screen or on distance close-outs.

On offense, again we see the combination of short for position and slow-footed for position reflect poorly on his ability to create much distance off the dribble. His side step into a three is very good, an important sign of developing counters to otherwise lackluster space creation. In particular, if he can develop a stampede step or heavy crossover into a Harden-style double-stepback (first onto one foot, then two), those types of menu items could launch him into stardom.

Right now, however, I see an extremely useful offensive player who could grease the wheels regardless of landing spot.

Results: The elite is elite and obstacles are obvious; what level of starter could he be remains a major question mark

GG Jackson, South Carolina

• vs. all competition: -0.5 BPM
• vs. top 100 teams: -1.6 BPM
• vs. top 50 teams:  -1.9 BPM

GG’s numbers were ugly no matter how you sliced the competition, but saw his assist and steal rates deteriorate the most as the opponents improved. Jackson was in a rare spot for a freshmen, with only Collin Sexton, Markelle Fultz, Jabari Parker, RJ Barrett, Jaylen Brown and D’Angelo Russell taking on greater usage all over the court as high major freshmen. That entire crew had over 100 attempts from the rim, midrange, three and free throw line in their sole NCAA season with usage at 30% or higher, an astronomical task for a freshman-aged player. Factor in how GG was not just young, but the youngest player in all of college basketball, and you get an even more unusual burden. Then, put on top of that the context of South Carolina being not just bad, but not even a top 200 team, and I understand if you’re throwing up your hands in confusion.

GG has earned a reputation as a chucker with low feel for the game, descriptions that may be correct at cursory glance but I believe to not hold up to further inspection. First of all, the context around him really is that bad. Factoring into how tight he was covered, his efficiency for both guarded and unguarded catch and shoot is both exactly league average.

Jackson’s efficiency was worst in isolation possessions, as, on a team with no other advantage creators outside of him, opponents could send as much help as they wanted. Lack of entry passing ability meant early seals or hard cuts would go unrewarded, though Jackson still kept making them. So he not just leaned on isolation possessions, but ended up #15 in the NCAA in iso possessions at 103.

When South Carolina’s lone traditional big sat, Jackson’s efficiency improved a significant degree (). It is true his passing creativity and vision is poor, but he is still able to zip establishing passes to keep an offense in rhythm (when he’s not in iso). An off-ball role would benefit him tremendously, as his turnover rate dropped significantly and efficiency was average to excellent in all of off-screen, roll man, putback, cut and spot up opportunities.

I believe in Jackson as a lottery bet on his ability to even take up this amount of offense on his shoulders, built with broad shoulders and a lightning quick second leap to make his presence consistently felt. His shooting form looks great to me, and ability to execute complex footwork at his size is often shocking. Those traits are what are valuable in isolation, with an inevitably better team context giving him upside we likely cannot yet discern.

Results: the most unusual context, but I see a future NBA scorer

The post The 2023 NBA Draft’s “Whiteboard” Prospects appeared first on Swish Theory.

The post Ep 18: It’s Brandon Miller Time appeared first on Swish Theory.

The post Ep 7: Early Season Scouting and the Art of Bart with @100guaranteed appeared first on Swish Theory.

The post Brandon Miller appeared first on Swish Theory.