I’ll also touch on my misses from last year, and how I hope to correct for shortcomings next cycle. Let’s waste no more time and dig in.

2023 Values

This section covers the players I ranked highest relative to the actual draft results, utilizing Kevin Pelton’s draft selection value table. Is there a common theme, am I missing or onto something?

Drafting with One Eye Closed

GG Jackson (my #12, drafted #45), Trayce Jackson-Davis (my #26, drafted #57), Leonard Miller (my #9, drafted #33), Jalen Slawson (my #28, drafted #54)

My biggest difference this cycle from last was trying to have a more holistic approach to a player’s own role curve. That is to say, comfort with a role (particularly in the NCAA) is not automatic, unlikely chosen by a player and often different than presented in recruiting efforts. College teams need players to win, development systems need player to develop, players just want to be selected as high as they can while balancing the goals of stakeholders around them. It can be messy, and often is.

The group I’m discussing here did not all have sub-optimal roles, but perhaps ones that masked their appeal as prospects, or distorted viewpoints of how they might contribute.

My single greatest difference to actual draft results was one Gregory Jackson the Second. At #12 on my board, Jackson was not selected until the second round by the Memphis Grizzlies. While rumors abound of immaturity from GG during team workouts, I’m less bothered given the substantial talent, obvious at his young age.

The most significant obstacle to draft analysis, in my view (beyond not knowing ball) is to make a one-to-one connection between items you notice and items of significance. Watching GG, it is not difficult to spot places where he could do better. Passing is the most obvious, often tunnel-visioned in his scoring approach, amplified at South Carolina by few other legitimate options but still clearly present in Summer League play as well. But if one were to ding Jackson for each and every missed pass, one might come away with a more negative view than is accurate in consideration of his star power, and that’s really what we’re here for.

It is more damaging to not take major swings than it is to have the occasional bust. If a player busts, his on-court impact simply goes to zero – there is a natural downside limit in that you’re not forced to give a player playing time, nor does it necessarily hurt your odds of acquiring more talent. But if he hits, and I mean truly hits, as in worth a max contract, that changes your franchise’s profile over a decade or more. This asymmetry runs up against basic human intuition: risk aversion means we are naturally suited to play it safe. But for that exact reason can be the source of extreme value in the NBA draft.

GG was third in usage of all freshmen as the youngest player in all of college basketball. He never looked overwhelmed athletically, consistently hitting the boards (17% defensive rebound rate) while using up a mega amount of iso (100), PNR (107) and spot up (143) possessions. Simply put, senior year HS aged players are not built like GG, not often. While a scout may see a sea of red marking up his execution on complex plays, he is able to put himself in those scenarios over and over with the flexible tank that is his hulking 6’9’’, 215 pound frame.

GG has a combination of traits I view highly in combination: when he has his nose in a play, he is determined to finish it (dawg factor); a frame to play power forward or small-ball center; the flexibility to get low into drives; an elite second jump; good shooting mechanics. Those are the traits of a scoring engine – as I put it in my scouting report of Jackson early in the season, “GG wants to be your team’s leading scorer,” and he has the mold for it. There are simply not many people in the world who have that combination of traits at an NBA level, and it takes two seconds watching GG move in Summer League to see how easily he belongs, physically.

Moving on to the rest of the group, the theme remains of swinging into uncertainty, where you have tangible evidence of NBA player-ness. By that last term I mean a collection of base skills that would be surprising to find in a non-NBA player. Let’s go through them quickly.

• Trayce Jackson-Davis: production, production and production; second jump; balance; sparks of creativity and touch at size
• Leonard Miller: dawg factor; production at age and competition; elite flexibility; sparks of creativity and touch at size
• Jalen Slawson: production and athletic versatility; team success; sparks of creativity and touch at size

The common trait for these remaining three is having some passing and some shooting touch but also defensive creativity, capable of picking up unexpected assists, steals or blocks in ways that took their opponents by surprise. Being two steps ahead of processing at lower levels, or even just hanging in at a higher level (in Miller’s case) is a good sign of being able to pick up NBA schemes, and the size of all three makes it easier to get the reps to showcase that. The flashes of touch and passing are simply compounding benefits as different areas of value on the court and expanding number of schemes in which they fit.

All four of the players here have role questions. “Can GG play off-ball?” (Summer League answer: yes); “Does Lenny fit cleanly into the 3, 4 or 5?” (Summer League answer: yes); “Can Trayce Jackson-Davis protect the rim as a 5?” (tbd); “Can Jalen Slawson shoot well enough to be a 3?” (tbd). But I also think these questions oversimplify what is a chaotic process in scouting. As Avinash said in his stellar Leonard Miller piece, “since when can we effectively project roles to begin with?”

That is not to say we shouldn’t try to project role, but we certainly shouldn’t let confusion in the exercise stop us from ranking a prospect highly.

I call this section “Drafting with One Eye Closed” as drafting is foremost an act of imagination, but that includes some willful optimism at times. The balance of cost relative to benefit of trying to make an unusual player work is lopsided, assuming the talent is indeed there. We draft players to try to alter the path of franchises, and the only way to do that is to try where others do not. Role occlusion, whether established upperclassmen or molds-of-clay youngsters, can be an opportunity masked by the same risk that drives people away.

To put the concept in more human terms, the game of basketball evolves in unexpected ways, and you need unexpected players to fit that evolving vision. The talent and effort side is the player’s job; fitting them onto the basketball court is the role of those around them.

Make Something Happen

Nick Smith Jr. (my #13, drafted #27), Amari Bailey (my #19, drafted #41), Sidy Cissoko (my #25, drafted #44)

Decision-making can be the most maddening NBA skill to dissect, making it all the more important in our evaluation of guards specifically. Guards typically survive on being nimbler, better handlers, shooters than their taller brethren, but this also means they have to make a greater number of decisions with or near the ball. If their decision-making is sound, they will make the product better, scheme running smoothly each time; if poor, the whole system can collapse. Repeat the process not once or a few times but dozens of times per game, thousands over a season. Despite having only middling 17% usage (7^th on his own team), Kyle Lowry still touched the ball over a thousand times in the 2023 playoffs, as an example. Whether or not a guard is a true lead initiator, they are going to be making countless decisions for your team.

Nick Smith Jr., Amari Bailey and Sidy Cissoko all make decisions in vastly different ways, which mixes differently for each of them with their differentiated skillsets. Sidy Cissoko is tall and strong for a guard but a poor shooter, Nick Smith Jr. is shorter and very skinny but a great shooter, Amari Bailey falls in between for all three traits.

Their playing cadences are vastly different, with NSJ being an elixir, playing like white blood cells seeking out weaknesses; Sidy is a maniac, unpredictable-squared; Amari Bailey is consistent in effort first and last. All are deviants from the expected in their own ways: given Nick Smith’s elite touch and handle creativity, one would expect him to be a pure hooper. Sidy one could easily cast aside as an unreliable project. Amari’s consistency of effort could prevent an analyst from noticing the flairs of upside.

My source of comfort in ranking them highly varies for each of them, as well. But it is consistent in one thing: the route-making of offensive schemes has always been a jagged line rather than a straight one. The ideal basketball play is a run to the basket and dunk, or run to the three point line and swish. But with the constancy of movement and ten athletes making decisions simultaneously, the way forward is rarely straight through.

This section is a dedication to the basketball weirdos, or irregularities in subtle ways. Amari Bailey may seem like the outlier in his inclusion, as Sidy and NSJ’s funkiness jump off the page. But Amari covers a ridiculous amount of ground as an athlete, both laterally and vertically, the type of athlete which would thrive as a cornerback or an outfielder or tennis player or…really anything. But Bailey plays subtly, workmanlike to the point of nearly hiding this fact. One is used to athletes of Bailey’s versatility taking up usage wherever they can, testing the limits of the dynamic fun that it must be to have those tools at one’s disposal. But Bailey, for whatever reason, does not seem to care about all of that, or else finds such enjoyment from applying them, not bluntly nor florid, but simply so. That aspect is maybe the easiest to look over: someone simply doing their job for its own sake. Especially in a freshman one-and-done, highly touted from a celebrity program. Don’t miss it with Amari.

Role Reducers: Priority UDFAs

Craig Porter Jr. (my #33), Adama Sanogo (#38), Terquavion Smith (#36), Justyn Mutts (#42), Ricky Council IV (#43), Taevion Kinsey (#45), D’Moi Hodge (#46)

Here we have a group of undrafted players I had ranked in my top 50. I’m not sure if there’s a common thread here beyond role players who I believe have a shot of being starters, even if miniscule.

All have their quick pitches as NBA role players: Porter Jr. makes sense as a defensive play-maker and creative passer next to a high usage guard. Sanogo if a team wants to run a five-out scheme on either end with a hybrid big. Terq is the obvious, nuclear pull-up shooting threat. Mutts is one of the best passing big wings in the country. Council had perhaps the best slashing tools in college hoops. Kinsey may be the most unusual, a stellar athlete ball custodian type with funky shot. D’Moi Hodge the cleanest role fit, and the most surprising undrafted for that reason as a steals & threes maven.

I mention the concept of “false ceiling” prospects, a term I coined to mean prospect commonly seen as low ceiling but with tougher-to-see avenues to outperform those expectations. I believe this entire group qualifies, let’s run through the list again. Porter Jr. does not make sense as a shotblocker, at 6’2’’ putting up a 5% block rate (one of every 20 opponent two pointers) while only fouling 2.3 times per 40(!!!). Sanogo has rare touch, shooting 77% at the rim on gigantic volume and above average everywhere else. Terq has become underrated as a passer, improving his A:TO from 1.2 to 1.9 and assist rate from 14% to 23%, all while shooting 14 threes per 100 possessions. Mutts is a rare breed, a strength-based wing with soft passing touch, perfect for motion-based, precise systems. Council’s athleticism shines in transition where he can improvise to the hoop for an acrobatic finish, at 1.2ppp on 114 transition attempts. Kinsey played in a lower conference, but that may mask his NBA athleticism, dunking over 200 times across his five college seasons. Hodge is underrated in his aggressiveness, with over 100 rim attempts finished at a 72% rate this past season.

The entire group are sophomores or older and non-premium selections as UDFAs, as it is safe to say you won’t build your team around this group. But if I were to bet on anyone undrafted ending up a useable starter at some point in their careers, it would be from this crew. The avenue to that happening has been laid out roughly in their previous spots, but amplified by further conforming to a reduced role and playing with greater talent around them.

Lessons of the Past

The 2022 draft cycle I spent obsessed with archetypes, attempting to break down the roles on the court into four: 1. Rim Protectors, 2. Connectors, 3. Shotmakers and 4. Engines. As I felt already by the time that draft day arrived, this approach had clear shortcomings. Prospects are not fully formed into their archetypes yet, and flashes of potential can be more important than fully fleshed out skills.

My three biggest misses all came from this too narrow of a sorting process. For Walker Kessler, I zoomed in too far on his inconsistent rim protection footwork technique, missing how he was blocking a gargantuan quantity of shots despite it due to advanced hand-eye coordination, size and effort. He also was able to quiet my mobility concerns by slimming down some, bringing us to another point of analysis: at the ages of prospects, they are still getting used to their athletic bodies.

Jalen Williams is another illustration of this, showcasing a major athletic leap from Santa Clara to the pros. The tape transformed almost overnight, as before when his closeouts lagged and he may have settled as a table-setter, now he looks a full power primary. The signal here was the Combine scrimmages, where J-Dub adapted to a more off-ball slashing role the second he hit the floor, using his plus wingspan to dunk in traffic with ease. The archetypes system over-fit for his Santa Clara role, not adaptive enough to appreciate his flashes of elite versatility.

Finally, a player I was too high on: Johnny Davis. At the risk of reacting too early, Johnny appears at the nexus of both of these points as well. From an archetype approach, JD is interesting. He was super physical in college, capable of some dribbling, passing, shooting, if not dominant anywhere. But he looked like he could carry a large load, and had enough clips of looking like a dynamic athlete, all the while fighting hard on the defensive end. The script has completely flipped between him and J-Dub, as Davis has been losing on the margins at the first line and without tools to salvage missteps. Where before he looked like a potential to hit in multiple archetypes, now he looks more like a mediocre prospect for each. The difference in athletic and skill profile from NCAA to NBA makes previous roles potentially untenable while also opening up new avenues for what were only flashes before.

Lessons for the Future

My goal this past cycle was to take a more holistic approach to a player’s basketball narrative. Where are they in their own cycle? A draft cycle involves only 6-8 months of new tape to indicate what a player might be for an entire career, and we need to imbue that with the appropriate lack of certainty. Imagination is the name of the game for draft work, something I’ve reminded myself constantly this past year, and helped me to be more comfortable with the one-eye-closed upside swings. Similarly, I have been keener to extrapolate those flashes out, as a player’s developmental trajectory can be as dynamic as their playing style.

The one item that remains elusive to me is projecting athletic profiles to the future. Already in Summer League I see a potential miss in Keyonte George, adapting quickly to weight loss with a more explosive playing style than we saw at Baylor or IMG. Athletic projection, again, a source of my miss on all of Kessler, J-Dub and (in the other direction) Johnny Davis, requires a technical level of biomechanical knowledge I have not attained. We have in our sights a theme for the 2024 cycle: how does the body develop amid intense athletic demands, and how can you tell who can incorporate these changes better than others? Stay tuned.

The post Lessons from the Draft Cycle appeared first on Swish Theory.

While the NBA playoffs rage on, the pre-draft process had its unofficial start as representatives from all 30 NBA teams made their way to Virginia for the 69th annual Portsmouth Invitational Tournament (“PIT”) this past week.

PIT serves as a chance for 64 college upperclassmen to test athletically and compete in front of scouts from every NBA team in an attempt to showcase why they deserve to be on their radar. The tournament has a storied history of producing NBA talent, even featuring star players such as Jimmy Butler, Scottie Pippen, Tim Hardaway Sr. and Dennis Rodman. Last year’s edition, for example, hosted nine players who went on to see NBA minutes this past season.

After making the trip to Norfolk last week, let me catch you up on what you may have missed, with a focus on those who made their mark above the rest.

Three Standout NBA Hopefuls

Craig Porter Jr. – Wichita State

Per game tournament stats: 9.0 Points, 5.3 Rebounds, 4.3 Assists, 3.3 Steals, 1.3 Blocks, 53/17/67%

*Shooting splits are 2PFG%/3PFG%/FT%*

On the surface, a 6-foot-2-inch guard scoring 9 points a game while shooting 17% from 3-point range isn’t particularly eye-catching. However, a look under the hood reveals one of the most interesting sleeper prospects in the entire draft.

If you ask any coach the best way to earn playing time they’ll almost always answer playing good defense. Craig showcased this constantly at PIT, amassing an absurd 4.6 stocks (steals + blocks) a game while also sticking to his man and recovering around screens at the point of attack. After finishing with the best standing vertical jump among the 61 attendees who participated in the athletic testing (34.5 inches, which would have been 2nd best at last year’s official NBA combine) and 2nd in the 3/4 court sprint, it’s clear that Porter has the athletic tools needed to impact the game defensively. While shot-blocking isn’t usually a priority as a guard defender, it is an area that a lot of the league’s best guard defenders standout in. Since 2008, Porter is one of just six players 6-foot-2-inches or shorter to finish a season with a block percentage above five. Looking at the list of college guards who managed block and steal rates similar to Porter’s you’ll find locksmiths like Gary Payton II, Derrick White, Danny Green, and Matisse Thybulle.

The obvious elephant in the room is on the offensive end where he scored a measly nine points per game with dismal three-point shooting. The low scoring is likely a byproduct of Porter’s PIT team opting to run their offense through other players, forcing him into a different role than he’s used to at Wichita State. With the Shockers, Porter ranked in the 91st percentile for frequency as a PNR ball-handler and 94th in isolation frequency. Don’t get it twisted, though: Porter is far from a ball-hog as evidenced by his 30.3 assist% this past season and 4.3 assists per game here at PIT. Porter dazzled the crowd making advanced reads often using visual manipulation to send defenders the wrong way before completing a myriad of different passes. That ability as a passer and ball-handler combined with his excellent finishing (65% at the rim in the half-court at Wichita State) proves he has many of the required offensive tools needed to succeed at the NBA level.

The clear limiting factor is his three-point shot, but even that has reason for optimism. Despite shooting a mediocre 36.3% from three-point range this season on underwhelming volume (only 5.8 attempts per 100 possessions), some of the underlying shooting indicators are very positive. He attempted 116 mid-range jumpers this past season at an impressive 44.8% FG% while also converting on 44.4% of his 36 floater attempts. However, even with some positive indicators, his 68.5% free throw percentage and hesitancy shooting off the catch with just 12 of such attempts this season doesn’t inspire the most confidence in his outside shooting projection.

Porter’s a somewhat confusing offensive prospect with a lot of both green and red flags. He also has some clear low-hanging fruit like his avoidance of driving baseline out of empty-side PNR’s as well as a heavy bias towards the pass or drive instead of shooting when faced with a closeout. However, it’s hard to ignore the value that high level point of attack defenders can provide at the guard spot in the NBA, especially those who offer some level of on-ball creation upside. When looking at what Porter offers and his likely availability in the late 2nd round or as an undrafted free agent, given his unique skillset it is hard not to get at least somewhat excited about Craig Porter Jr.

Sir’Jabari Rice – Texas

Per game tournament stats: 16.3 Points, 3.7 Rebounds, 3.0 Assists, 0.7 Steals, 0.0 Blocks, 70/45/86%

As a key contributor for a Texas team that was minutes away from a FinalFour appearance, Sir’Jabari Rice came into PIT with the label of a “winning player.” It should then come as no surprise, then, that his team cruised to a tournament championship capped off with Rice winning tournament MVP honors. He was the clear vocal leader for his team and, put simply, the vibes were strong throughout the entire tournament.

On the offensive end, the 6-foot-4.5-inch shooting guard’s game builds off him having the strongest go-to move in the entire tournament. A confident shooter and passer who happens to do both from the same slot makes Rice’s pump-fake a double threat, also serving as a potential pass. To truly understand how dominant this weapon is, you honestly just have to see for yourself. Paired with his phenomenal flexibility and agility, his pump makes Rice an absolute force when attacking a closeout. On top of that, he also does a great job of moving without the ball and quickly passing to keep the offense fluid.

As for the defensive side of the ball, Rice does a great job playing the ball aggressively while also preventing his man from getting an easy blow-by. Sitting close to the action you could clearly hear him communicating coverages when tasked with a ball screen. He fought through those screens well, recovering to his man quickly. With a long 6-foot-9-inch wingspan, he has the length to disturb shooters at a high level for a guard, and all-in-all provides more than enough value on that end of the floor. Given Rice’s readily apparent skill and his lovable team-first attitude it would be a complete shock to not see him on an NBA roster come next season.

Toumani Camara – Dayton

Per game tournament stats: 20.0 Points, 11.0 Rebounds, 2.7 Assists, 1.3 Steals, 1.3 Blocks, 51/17/94%

While Sir’Jabari Rice won tournament MVP honors, it was clear that the general consensus was in favor of Dayton’s Toumani Camara as the most dominant player in attendance. Despite a lack of team success during the tournament, Camara clearly had an extra athletic gear that the rest of the players simply could not match.

Throughout this past season at Dayton, Camara provided one of the single most valuable things in basketball: consistent rim pressure. That was no different here at PIT where his ability to get to the rim off the dribble at 6-foot-8-inches emphatically stood out. Camara’s known for his explosive leaping ability, highlighted by his 66 dunks in 68 games at Dayton, but his flexibility really stood out here, too. He’s very comfortable getting low and contorting around his defender at the first level to get downhill, an item many struggle with when they first face professional-level talent.

In his first game of the tournament, Camara dropped 27 points including a pair of three point makes which highlighted just how deadly he could be if he can get the shot to fall consistently. He converted on a respectable 36.2% of his three-point attempts this past season, but doing so at a volume of just 4.9 attempts per 100 possessions doesn’t inspire the most confidence in his outside shot being a major factor as competition increases.

In talking to people around the arena, most questioned if Camara would even opt to play in his team’s final game after proving all he needed to in the first two. Fortunately he did play, and while he struggled to score at the same level he did in the first two games, that gave him an opportunity to showcase what he can provide outside of scoring. His 13 rebounds, five assists, two steals, and two blocks with zero turnovers displayed that versatility.

On the defensive end, Camara was impactful as a helper, but did concede some blow-bys easier than you’d like. Fortunately, his size and recovery tools, highlighted by his 7-foot wingspan, were more than enough to allow him to recover and erase those mistakes. Overall, Camara’s athleticism and ability to create rim pressure by himself as a forward has landed him firmly on NBA team radars. That makes him our final pick for the highest-likelihood NBA hopefuls.

G-League With Pathways To The NBA

Nathan Mensah – San Diego State

Per game tournament stats: 13.7 Points, 9.7 Rebounds, 1.7 Assists, 0.7 Steals, 2.0 Blocks, 65/0/64%

Sales Systems was one of two tournament finals teams, driven by one consistent, major advantage: elite rim protection. That was almost entirely due to the work of San Diego State’s Nathan Mensah. Measuring in at 6-feet-11-inches with a 7-foot-5.5-inch wingspan Mensah was dominant as a rim deterrent. This trait stood out to such a degree that it very well could be enough to earn him a spot on an NBA roster on its own. However, for him to secure long-term NBA success he’ll likely need some specialty to add to his game on the offensive end. Most NBA centers standout in some way: some shine as a rim runner, others as a facilitator, maybe even as a floor spacer, all of which Mensah currently lacks. Mensah has a solid case for an NBA roster spot day 1, but realistically something has to improve on the offensive end for him to thrive at the NBA level. His passing may just end up as that skill, at nearly two assists per game playing as his team’s big man.

D’Moi Hodge – Missouri

Per game tournament stats: 19.3 Points, 3.7 Rebounds, 1.0 Assists, 1.0 Steals, 1.3 Blocks, 57/50/73%

D’Moi Hodge combines a pair of very appealing skills — versatile shooting and low-risk, mistake free basketball. After turning in a season at Missouri shooting 40% from three on a massive 14.1 attempts per 100 possessions, Hodge was able to reinforce his status as a knockdown shooter at PIT, converting on 50% of his looks from deep. When paired with his impressively mistake-free style of play (becoming just the 13th high-major NCAA player to have a turnover percentage below 8% while maintaining a usage rate over 20% this past season) creates a compelling guard prospect on the offensive end.

That mistake-free style carries over to the defensive end, too, where Hodge rarely messes up a ball screen coverage or finds himself out of position. Despite that relatively safe reputation, he’s still plenty aggressive as an on-ball defender, amassing a phenomenal 5.1 steal% this past season at Missouri. While there’s a lot to like about Hodge’s game already, as he’s certainly earned himself a spot on a G-League roster this upcoming season, his lack of offerings inside the arc on offense will likely need to be improved before he can expect NBA minutes with any regularity.

G-League Ready

Tevian Jones – Southern Utah

Per game tournament stats: 18.7 Points, 2.3 Rebounds, 0.7 Assists, 0.7 Steals, 0.0 Blocks, 79/50/100%

Grabbing the highest scoring single game of the tournament is one way to make sure you standout, and that’s exactly what Southern Utah’s Tevian Jones did with 36 points in his second game at PIT. The 6-foot-7-inch forward converted on 50% of his threes throughout the tournament, a skill he’s developed immensely during his time in college. We were also treated to flashes of his ball-handling ability, something he showed this past season as the ball-handler in three pick and rolls per game.

That being said, Jones’ stay at PIT failed to showcase his ability to contribute to the game in ways other than scoring. This past season, his 0.3% block rate, 1.6% steal rate and 7.2% assist percentage all fell short of inspiring confidence in his other traits. Jones clearly earned a spot in the G-League, but he’ll need to become a more well-rounded contributor while he’s there if he wants to get NBA looks.

Umoja Gibson – DePaul

Per game tournament stats: 11.3 Points, 3.0 Rebounds, 6.0 Assists, 1.0 Steals, 0.0 Blocks, 38/53/0%

Umoja Gibson’s first two games resulted in a somewhat underwhelming 8 points and 11 assists, and it felt incredibly unlucky. Gibson was doing everything right, always in the right spots, taking good shots and setting up his teammates well. He looked the part of the perfect game manager point guard. Which made it all the more exciting when he popped-off for 26 points and 7 assists in his team’s final game of the tournament. Umoja clearly has a great understanding of both his job within the team as the point guard and how to execute it. With that said, the level of skill required for a guard who measured in a hair under 6-foot-1-inch is disproportionately high compared to the rest of the league, and it’s unfortunately not clear if Umoja is there yet. Regardless, he’ll be running the offense of one professional team or another come next season.

Hunter Tyson – Clemson

Per game tournament stats: 12.0 Points, 4.5 Rebounds, 1.0 Assists, 1.0 Steals, 0.0 Blocks, 33/50/100%

*Sustained an injury 9 minutes into second game (missed 3rd entirely)*

Draining five threes in the opening game of the tournament, it felt like Hunter Tyson may never miss. Unfortunately his tournament was cut short with an injury in the first half of his second game, serving as an abrupt ending. Despite this, Hunter was able to showcase his high motor and ability to knockdown shots off movement and around screens. Shooters who can knock down difficult shots are valuable, especially those who stand as tall as Tyson at 6-feet-7-inches. That being said, he did seem a step slow at times on defense. On top of that, he didn’t seem comfortable getting downhill to attack closeouts, often giving up that advantage and opportunity to find shots at the rim. While Tyson’s sample size was small, his shotmaking certainly stood out and will undoubtedly earn himself a spot on a G-League roster.

Ed Croswell – Providence

Per game tournament stats: 17.0 Points, 8.3 Rebounds, 1.3 Assists, 0.3 Steals, 0.3 Blocks, 59/20/71%

Ed Croswell has an incredibly strong frame at 6-foot-8-inches and 247 pounds with a lengthy 7-foot-2-inch wingspan. He was a dominant interior force and was in the upper echelon of athletes at the event. He showed a clear knowledge of his responsibilities within the team, often cutting from the dunker spot, offering a great target for point guard Umoja Gibson. On the defensive end, it felt as if he didn’t miss his assignment the entire tournament. However, in today’s NBA spacing the floor is a necessity to survive, and Croswell attempted a mere five jump shots total during his 949 minutes for Providence this past season. With that in mind, Croswell is certainly bound for the G-League and has a lot of NBA upside if that shot ever does come around.

David Singleton III – UCLA

Per game tournament stats: 8.0 Points, 6.5 Rebounds, 0.5 Assists, 0.5 Steals, 0.0 Blocks, 50/31/0%

Standing 6-foot-5-inches, David Singleton is your prototypical modern three-and-D wing. Despite his shots not falling at PIT, he converted on 42.4% of his three-point attempts this past season at a good volume of 9.8 attempts per 100 possessions. In 164 appearances at UCLA over the past five seasons, Singleton started only one-fourth of games. However, UCLA had a better net rating in 4 of his 5 seasons with the Bruins. Singleton stood out as someone who thrived in his role, switching along the perimeter on defense, spacing the floor and keeping the ball moving on offense, and playing with a high level of intensity overall. While he not be on NBA radars year one, he certainly earned a spot in the G-League with his showcase at PIT.

The post The Pre-Draft Process Kicks Off: Analyzing the 2023 Portsmouth Invitational Tournament appeared first on Swish Theory.