#17 Pick – Jalen Hood-Schifino, 6-6 G, Indiana

Playing in the Big 10 and going through highs and lows in his lone freshman season at Indiana, Jalen Hood-Schifino was not the most popular pick the Lakers could’ve made at #17. With top-5 projected pick Cam Whitmore falling down the draft board reportedly due to worrying medicals, there was a sense that the Lakers would be the team to give in and take the high-end talent that was Whitmore. Instead, the Lakers trusted their board and went with a guy who has plenty of talent in his own right to go along with his high IQ and scalability alongside the two stars in LeBron James and Anthony Davis.

Jalen Hood-Schifino is a smooth, but big guard. Standing at 6-foot-6 and weighing in at 216 lbs, the Lakers should welcome him with open arms as he adds more size to their backcourt. He has a slick, tight handle that allows him to traverse the court with ease, and has the strength to shield off defenders while deploying his handle. As far as standout traits go, his steady ability to operate and score out of the pick-and-roll is very impressive to watch at such an early stage of his basketball career. 

Indiana, under former NBA coach Mike Woodson, ran a ton of pick-and-rolls between Hood-Schifino and Trayce Jackson-Davis (a well-rounded big that went 57th in the draft to the Golden State Warriors). Hood-Schifino’s sweet spot on the court is the midrange from 10 feet all the way out to right before the arc. He is very comfortable there and will go to that pull-up midrange a ton as he ranks in the 73rd percentile on off-the-dribble jumpers out of all D1 players. He was able to knock down a good amount of open looks due to Jackson-Davis’ impeccable screening but JHS was also able to play make in these situations as well. To add further context, the personnel on Indiana’s roster made the spacing complicated and playmaking chances were narrowed, but Hood-Schifino made the best of what he had to work with. He showed some impressive playmaking with either hand and mostly to Jackson-Davis who he had amazing chemistry with. Last season after the trades, coach Darvin Ham loved to run the three-guard lineup consisting of D’Angelo Russell, Austin Reaves, and Dennis Schröder, and due to his skill and size Hood-Schifino should be able to plug and play in this lineup as needed. At Indiana, he was not asked to be much of a connector as he was the primary initiator in most cases but with his slick passing, awareness off-ball, and decisive attacks, he has the tools needed to be a good enough connector to play alongside other ballhandlers.

Improvement Areas on Offense: Two massive warts in Hood-Schifino’s game right now are his finishing and 3PT shooting. Per Synergy, he shot 52.5% at the rim and 30% on his catch-and-shoot threes. With his size and wingspan, I think his finishing will be an easy area to correct, but as of right now he just doesn’t have the finishing craft required for guys without elite athleticism. The craft—deceleration, using the shoulder bump effectively, high finishes off-glass, not taking off from far away—should be skills he learns and utilizes as he gets older and gets more experience in the league. He only had four dunks on the year and all of which were of the “Rimgrazer 2K dunk package” variant and you’d just expect more lift coming from a 6-6 guard. The shooting is a bit tricky though, as he shot 30% on his catch and shoot threes but interestingly shot a much better 37% on his off-the-dribble threes. And this is a complete contrast to his high school numbers at Montverde Academy, where he shot 35% on his catch-and-shoot threes but 15% on his off-the-dribble threes, so his 3PT shooting is a bit all over the place. However, there is some optimism that with how good of a midrange shooter he is, he can expand that jumper to beyond the arc on a consistent basis. This would be very beneficial for the Lakers’ yearly spacing concerns and would make the offense more dynamic as a whole.

Defense: Hood-Schifino’s size and length with his 6-10 wingspan make shooting over his contests a struggle for opponents. His tenacity combined with strength and mobility at the point of attack is something that few players had in this draft class and was a trait that made him stand out. Overall, his screen navigation is solid, however, when he does get caught up on a screen he doesn’t recover and get back into the play as much as I would like him to. He has a lot of moments in pick-and-roll situations where there wasn’t enough communication which ultimately led to open shots for the other team, but now with Anthony Davis defending pick-and-rolls with him, that shouldn’t be an issue. Hood-Schifino can also be overaggressive at the point of attack where he can get beat just by guarding the player farther out than needed. Occasionally he did get beat by quicker guards which leads me to think he could be more suited as a wing defender instead of being primarily at the point of attack. Either way, he’s versatile enough where I would trust him to guard 1-3 and be solid all around. Off the ball, he’s an engaged team defender and was a really good nail and stunt/recover defender in Indiana’s scheme that was tactically very sound and drilled really well. He was also good at making sound rotations although his closeouts could be better, these are the little things that will get him on the court early so they’re just as important as the bigger things. 

Expectations: It would not surprise me at all if Hood-Schifino had a slow/rough start to the season but, he has a good enough foundation in all facets of the game for me to trust him long-term with good development. I expect he will be used in a lot of pick and roll, but he will also have to grow as an off-ball player to prove he can be the versatile connector that so many contending teams desire. He’s very well rounded, thinks the game well on both ends, and from multiple reports from the Lakers and at Indiana, is a high character person on and off the court with tons of work ethic. I think we will see him going up and down from South Bay to the main squad as he adjusts and gets acclimated to the next level. Over the course of the season, I could definitely see him getting more and more comfortable, eventually leading to consistent rotation minutes on the main squad.

#40 Pick – Maxwell Lewis, 6-7 W, Pepperdine

The big get the Lakers were able to pull off in the (almost) consensus opinion of the draft community, was acquiring Maxwell Lewis at the 40th pick as this might not have even been the case if they didn’t deal with the Pacers to move up a couple spots. Lewis was projected in the 20s throughout most of the year but was one of several players in this year’s draft to have a surprising slip down the board. Nonetheless, the Lakers were able to add somebody who oozes talent in a variety of ways.

Lewis is a 6-7 skilled wing that simply knows how to put the ball in the basket. Per Synergy, he graded out as “Good” or “Very Good” in the following play types: spot-ups, transition, P&R ball handler, post-ups, off-screen, and cuts. His versatility as a scorer will be very welcomed on a Laker team that had a couple of guys who were only comfortable in certain situations and only could score in certain play types; that isn’t the case for Maxwell.

It starts with his jumper where Lewis has pristine mechanics and can get it off comfortably in a lot of ways. Catch-and-shoot, coming off of screens, pump fake one dribble jumper, midrange pull-ups, 3PT pull-ups, stepback threes, sidestep threes, and even turnaround and face-up jumpers in the post, Lewis is capable of pretty much whatever is required of him in the moment of each particular scoring situation. Although Lewis’ overall 3PT percentage was an average 35%, he shot a blazing 44% on catch-and-shoot threes which is something he will be doing a lot when he gets to the big leagues. It’s also his jumper that allows him to exploit defenders who guard him too high up expecting a three, where he’s able to drive around them with ease. Or when defenders are overplaying him off-ball and he can cut to the rim and show off his athleticism and finishing package. He’s shown the ability to attack off the catch as well, bursting through the gaps of a rotating defense although I’d like for him to hone in on this even more. Lewis shot a very good 63% at the rim this season which can be a bit surprising looking at his slim and slender frame. He uses long strides to get to the rim and utilizes his long wingspan effectively when at the rim to finish around contests.

Improvement Areas on Offense: At Pepperdine, Lewis was relied upon a lot, leading the Waves (easily the best team name in college ball) in FGA and in usage rate. And since Lewis was so efficient in several different areas well, they went to him a lot and for good reason, but this came with a drawback. Lewis posted a negative assist-to-turnover rate of 2.8 assists to 3.3 turnovers per game and at times, looked a bit over-tasked as the primary shot-creator for the team. Combined with his loose handle and wild pass accuracy, he can produce some chaotic possessions that added up at the end to 5, 6, or even 7-turnover nights. Lewis also doesn’t have the best vision when creating and can get stuck in “scoring mode” very often. Now that isn’t to say he can’t pass, as he loves mixing in a dump-off pass, throwing it to a diving big when the defense blitzes him, and can through the occasional cross-court pass. Still, reading the court more consistently will be something he’ll need to improve upon at the next level.

A couple of other improvements I would like to see offensively is he had a lot of traveling calls at the start of an attack, mainly in spot-up situations but this is a minor issue and should be ironed out over time. Another improvement he can make and probably his biggest is that he should be cutting to the rim way more often so he can use his plus athleticism to his advantage. On offense, he can kind of just float off the ball and stand in one spot if there isn’t some set motion or actions going on and he really doesn’t cut unless he is being overplayed. This led to games where he would end up taking only 7 or 8 shots as the team’s best player which made you leave scratching your head wondering where he disappeared to on offense. Mixing in some smart cuts would be found money for him going forward and I’d love to see it.

Defense: Now, on to the main question mark of Maxwell Lewis and what will ultimately determine his floor as an NBA player, his defense. I’ve seen him get a two-way label slapped on him from various Twitter accounts and as a prospect, Lewis was definitely not a two-way player. The simplest way to put this is, when I watch Lewis it feels like he’s just out there. Not going that extra mile to be a positive, but is doing just enough to not be a negative. His reaction time isn’t that great and he doesn’t follow his man as tight as you would want off-ball, allowing slips in the crack for his man to exploit by smart cuts. These mental mistakes combined with the fact his technique on that end isn’t that great and he gets blown-by way more often than he should, he will have a lot to work on defensively once he gets in the league. There were many plays where I thought he could’ve slid to help and actively tried to create somewhat of a defensive presence but he just doesn’t. This is where his upside comes in with his 7-foot wingspan; he most definitely has the tools to become a positive defender. But this is also the reason why he slid; at Pepperdine, was it that he didn’t try to put in the extra effort on defense due to him being the star? Or does he just not have the defensive intangibles needed to be a positive defender? And the latter question is the worrisome outcome if true because the offense will have to weigh out the defense and that pathway isn’t something you can bet on unless the player’s offense is clearly a significant positive for his team every time he’s on the court.

Expectations: If the Lakers gave Maxwell Lewis the “Talen Horton-Tucker Plan” of pretty much exclusively playing in the G League while the main team is trying to contend, that would not shock me one bit. Especially with Lewis’ thin frame, it could take him a while to get used to NBA-level basketball and that is fine. The Lakers are not in a situation where they need him to be a contributor from day one like what might’ve been the case a couple of rosters ago. All that matters for this upcoming season is reps and development because the outcome could be pretty special if it all pans out.

The post Lakers Draft Recap: Skill to Build Upon appeared first on Swish Theory.

Not only will this piece analyze their games up to this point, but also give home remedies to fix what has gone astray. Developmental time when you enter “the league” is highly variable, dependent on draft slot, training staffs and existing personnel. But these players are often already a season behind given poor fitting one-and-done campaigns. Let’s see if we can’t help to set the new crews off on the right foot.

Dereck Lively (RSCI #2, Pick #12 to Dallas Mavericks)

Lively has perhaps the largest discrepancy between strengths and weaknesses in this class, and it wasn’t always clear Duke knew which was which. His up and down season included an early season benching, no longer starting as of the second week of January, but was able to bounce back by season end. His offensive toolset paled in comparison to the more versatile Kyle Filipowski, but defensive dominance is perhaps better suited for the pro game.

My favorite trait of Lively’s is his complete discipline on the defensive end of the court. Watching his pre-college tape alerts one to how this is: playing next to also-elite rim protector Jalen Duren in AAU, Lively learned to move all about the court and have an impact, not just stand near the hoop. Controlled aggressiveness has always been the name of the game for the seven-footer: a description likely worth a lottery pick at face value. His 5.2 fouls per 40 minutes I attribute more to just how many actions he covered, and not unprecedented in elite rim protector prospects (see: Joel Embiid’s 5.8 per 40).

The offensive end is limited in the strictest sense of the word. He is limited in that he has zero post moves and poor touch with the ball, but is able to find areas of value regardless. Returning again to his two-big lineup days, Lively is excellent passing to the interior, a coveted trait for a player of his size. He is able to seek passing windows for drop offs, even occasionally dribbling once or twice to create the space. He truly reminds one of Boston’s Robert Williams III in his ability to let go of the ball quickly despite zero shooting gravity. Expect him to be effective at dribble hand offs as well as empty side pick and rolls, anywhere he will be less rushed with a gap to create even a little.

Rookie Year Remedy: Rim First, Always

There is plenty to like about Lively as an NBA player, #8 on my board. But to insure he sets off on the right path, it’s important to tie him to his livelihood: the rim. Lively is an excellent roamer, but his size and technique better suits a hedge and recover big. If there is one area Lively lacks on defense, it is rim-first approach: he prefers to hunt out the action regardless of where it is. Instilling rim-first defensive principles is essential to him reaching that lofty All-Defense potential, an item Duke failed to preach, harmed by his inconsistent role.

While there was all kinds of hubbub about Lively’s three point shooting potential leading up to the draft, that is a highly unrealistic outcome in my mind for a 60% free throw shooter who made *1* midrange shot all season. In his rookie year with Dallas, Lively should be either 1. In the dunker’s spot, or 2. Hitting a body and rolling to the hoop, at any given point. Oftentimes at Duke he looked in no man’s land, setting a screen into a pre-failed action: that will not be the case with Luka, and makes it all the more important to know exactly where to space.

Brice Sensabaugh (RSCI #49, Pick #28 to Utah Jazz)

It is difficult to understand how Sensabaugh was ranked so low coming out of high school, or why he came off the bench for Ohio State. He has every sign of a unique scoring talent, eating up midrange space as a prospect to then let the feathery touch do the rest of the work. The defense needs work, but that is often the case for premier scoring talents like Brice.

First of all, the numbers – Sensabaugh shot 172 midrange attempts and made just short of half of them. Only Grant Williams and Marcus Morris exceeded his midrange volume and efficiency, and Brice had only 18% of his makes assisted compared to 50% for Grant, 43% for Morris. There is a good case to be made for Brice as the best midrange scorer in recent NCAA history.

So then, why did he fall to the 20s?

The defense, at times, is indeed indefensibly bad. Worst of all is the assignment confusion, a threat to his NBA playing time when player movement is ramped up to a far greater degree. Counteracting this is his defensive rebounding, where his rates of securing boards looks indeed like athletic wings, similar to that of Paul George or Miles Bridges in college. Brice is a big body, and knows how to leverage it in a timely manner when locked in. This gives us hope.

The passing is the other nitpick, and much more nitpicky. Passing is more context dependent than defense at a college setting, and Sensabaugh’s unique scoring traits make him a square peg in round hole for most traditional systems. I saw plenty of talent in him moving the ball, particularly adept at understanding how to make even a shallow drive into a kick. He will never be an offensive conductor, but you want Sensabaugh to finish plays anyways, rather than start them.

Rookie Year Remedy: Work From the Corners

The biggest benefit to Sensabaugh in an NBA system will be how he can no longer be the primary focus of opposing defenses. Sensabaugh struggles to get first steps on opponents, but is excellent at maximizing whatever margin is available. If he can lean into a spot up first, midrange craft second approach as a rookie, he can leverage his teammates’ scoring to help his own, and passing.

On defense as well, keeping Sensabaugh away from the action and close to the tin for rebounding purposes is the way. He will certainly be targeted in switches, where it will be essential for him to stay disciplined – his low steal rate and fairly high foul rate point to a poor decision-maker as it comes to trying to play-make on defense. He can be often found swiping where he shouldn’t, determined to compensate for lack of foot speed.

Utah has a bit of a challenge in finding how to maximize Sensabaugh’s unique talents, but Brice playing inside of his game can help shorten that journey.

Noah Clowney (RSCI #74, Pick #21 to Brooklyn Nets)

Clowney had less of a flawed season and more of a narrowly-defined one. He accepted a role player position at Alabama as a top-100 recruit in Nate Oats’ structured system, a three-and-D power forward between prized Brandon Miller and veteran Charles Bediako. Clowney filled the role admirably, putting up the fifth best Box Plus-Minus grade of any high major freshman.

Watching Noah’s pre-NCAA tape you see mostly the same, but there is intrigue along the fringes. The type that certainly tipped the Brooklyn Nets into seeing more. Most notably, I think Clowney can pass. Not guard-level passing, but adequate for a big, reminding me a bit of Minnesota’s Josh Minott the draft before. He cannot dribble beyond once or, maybe, twice, but when he does he makes the right play more often than you’d expect (for someone who can’t really dribble). The technique needs work, but you can see the outlines of a viable DHO conductor. Clowney got very little practice with the ball on a stacked Bama team, so it’s difficult to say what the ceiling is.

The archetype is swell: Clowney can block some shots, hit some threes, and use his size, strength and touch to finish inside and rebound. Unfortunately, his shotblocking is closer to good than great, three point shot closer to bad than good. But what I was most impressed with is how decisive Noah is when he gets the ball near the basket. His one-step craft to finish is indeed good, and, as Clowney is still not even 19, may end up very good.

Rookie Year Remedy: Play the 5

Now, I just pointed out Clowney lacks high-end polish and consistency across the court…you want him to take on more responsibility? Yes.

Clowney has the physique to hang in the interior, if not the discipline yet. But as a middle-of-the-pack squad lacking a big man floor spacer, the Nets can do worse than giving Clowney some bench run. As the five man, Clowney can refine his interior discipline, often caught contesting on his feet but leaning too far over, allowing his opponent to draw easy fouls. Rep those traits out of him while you have the chance.

Additionally, Clowney with a clean paint will allow him to experiment in ways he was prohibited at Alabama. Despite not being close to a focal point of the offense, Clowney had 27 dunks (6 more than Brandon Miller) and shot a very strong 64% on non-dunk rim attempts. He only took 25 midrange shots but hit half of them, encouraging that his touch is more effective inside the arc. As some more encouraging stats, when Clowney played without Bediako on the floor his free throw rate rose from 0.27 to 0.64; his rim rate from 35% to 56%; his rim finishing from 67% to 74%. He shot fewer threes but gained efficiency everywhere.

Clowney is unlikely to ever be a starting center or power forward, but by letting him run as a backup 5, he may improve both skills. He is strong enough at his core to eventually handle the more physical assignments, let him prove his offense against that.

Cam Whitmore (RSCI #12, Pick #20)

 Whitmore is a high-flying tank, a tornado of activity with a punch, punch to the rim. It’s easy to mix metaphors for a player whose movements make little sense. He’s a stout 232 but has one of the quickest first steps in the class. He is a power mover who can also chop his legs. I would not like to guard Cam Whitmore.

So, why am I lower on him? Well, first of all, he’s quite predictable. Whitmore loves his left, almost always utilizing a combination of a lefty in and out, crossover into either pull-up or straight line acceleration to the rim. The issue is the complexity and flexibility: despite the magic of his movements, it is still tough at the size of a torso to chain together quick moves.

On top of that, Whitmore does not seem like a very creative player. Much of his pre-NCAA production came from transition play, which, yes, that absolutely should be a priority of his NBA game. But he also misses open passes, some obvious rotations, and generally prefers to go from point A to point B without a flexion point in between.

I’m optimistic on him being a plus defensive player simply due to the significance of his physical tools; that quick of a step at that size is going to get blocks and especially steals. Steals are as valuable of a task one can complete outside of putting the ball in the basket. But when it comes down to papering over all the little items opponents can exploit in high-stakes matchups, it is not clear Whitmore is up for the task.

Rookie Year Remedy: Keep It Simple

I run the risk of being low on Whitmore in the same way I was too low on Bennedict Mathurin: NBA teams will be able to cover up for his weaknesses by getting him in his optimal spots. In particular, a young team like the Houston Rockets should be more than happy to run with Whitmore on the wings. Fortunately, he will not need to create many advantages on his own when playing off of Amen Thompson, passing extraordinaire, allowing him to catch the ball when already downhill. The combined pace and vertical talent of those two will be extremely difficult to contain in the open court.

The defensive end might be trickier, on a team that had the second worst points allowed per possession last season. The Rockets still lack an identity on that end, but might do best to lean into their hectic event creators of Tari Eason and Amen as steal mavens: a constantly roaming crew would also make the transition into transition easier.

The minutes breakdown in Houston will be fascinating to watch this year. But they have at their disposal, now, such a dynamic of talent that in order to take advantages of their weakness you may have to first disable their advantages. Leaning into Houston’s collective strengths with quite the store of talent will yield some unexpected results; many of those involve Whitmore as a major player.

Dariq Whitehead (RSCI #1, Pick #22 to Brooklyn Nets)

There was not a single prospect who deserved to have his season tape thrown out than Dariq. With a foot injury that required surgery before the season which never properly healed and a lower leg strain mid-season, Whitehead never looked close to his usual self. It is painful to even watch him try to move around the court wearing a Duke jersey; I cannot imagine what it felt like. Here’s hoping he undergoes the recovery he deserves.

To imagine what he might look like on the other side, we resort more to his high school and AAU tape. Whitehead was arguably the best player in all of high school basketball, rated first in the entire class by RSCI as well as winning the Naismith High School Player of the Year Trophy, back to back national championships and the MVP award for the McDonald’s All-Star Game. While Whitehead’s teams often featured other NBA-level talent, he stuck out consistently for his poise under pressure and contributions across the court.

Dariq is not without flaws as a prospect, but may be without any significant enough to call a true weakness. His athleticism is tilted more towards pace and balance than burst and power, but he is still able to win on first step and dunk above rim protectors here and there. I would advise against putting him on the quicker guards, but he should have no issue finding a suitable assignment on the wing. Whitehead simply contributes across various axes: his constant activity and nose for advantages means locating rebounds, rising and firing in a crowd, excelling at connecting passing but capable of throwing advantage-creating ones as well.

Whitehead has long been a favorite of mine to watch, and I feel a disservice to him in not being selected until the 20s. The NBA draft, first and foremost, is about imagination, even if it’s not obvious on the surface. Whitehead may not recover his full athleticism, but he was always more of a problem-solver than nuclear athlete anyways.

Rookie Year Remedy: Pindowns Galore

For once, it would be nice if things were made easy for Whitehead. From essential connector piece as a HS underclassman to shouldering the usage load as a HS upperclassman to just trying to stay on the court at Duke, he has fought for all he’s taken. I am proposing making it easier on Dariq.

My two favorite Whitehead weapons are the quickness with which he can get his shot off and his ability to stay upright on drives. Wrap those up with some decisive and creative playmaking and you have yourself an excellent play finishing prospect, especially if he stands at 6’6’’. I trust Whitehead perhaps as much as any in the class to make a dribble-pass-shoot decision off the catch while moving through a crowd, so here’s hoping that’s the desired destination for the Nets in getting Dariq up to speed.

Jordan Walsh (RSCI #17, Pick #38 to Boston Celtics)

If you got by Jordan Walsh, no you didn’t. Jordan Walsh has about as ideal as possible recovery tools on the defensive end. Inevitably, even the shutdown defenders lose a step to a true-blue offensive star. The basketball court is tilted towards the offense as the holder of the first move, and how little space it takes for many to get a shot off. But after the gap is created, Walsh will be as good as any at crawling back into perfect position; in fact, many of his steals and blocks came from what would be considered a disadvantageous position.

Walsh is the best shutdown defender prospect in this class, and the best I can remember in recent classes. Unfortunately for Walsh and other such as Usman Garuba, being a lockdown defender does not always guarantee playing time, especially if, as both of them are, you are an offensive liability.

Jordan almost certainly will be a negative on offense, but I am here to argue there is a chance he will not, and perhaps much greater than you think. The shot is where we start, inaccurate but not broken, as there is a lot to like: a simple one-two motion, decently set feet, but inaccuracy due to spatial issues (he throws inaccurate passes here and there) and a bit exaggerated of a form. Both can be fixed by corner three reps, as his 71% from the line, 28% from three and 36% on deep twos point to 33%+ on open threes potential.

The more significant reason for optimism lies in his tape from Link Academy. While inactive most of his time on offense for Arkansas, at Link he was the key to both their transition offense and connecting their half-court offense. He looked far more confident on the move, as with the Razorbacks could get overwhelmed in catch and drive situations. But I see a real passing threat as Walsh is highly creative for a wing and has the athletic tools to take advantage, or else get to the rim. Time to think at Arkansas meant overthinking, but again we see a lane for some offensive value.

Rookie Year Remedy: Just Belong

Walsh gets my most esoteric suggestion, as he simply needs to relax and trust the system on offense. That will be much easier, hopefully, in an ironed out NBA system with a longer view on Walsh’s role. Boston acquiring an early second round draft pick to take the defensive stud – a type they are long familiar with – is encouraging that he will be brought along at the right pace. Obvious from the tape, Walsh loves technique and being in the right place: the Celtics’ infrastructure should encourage that.

To get more concrete about the basketball court, Boston could use some additional front-court athleticism, particularly attacking the rim. Walsh is a stellar vertical athlete, clocking a 33 inch standing vert on top of a 7’1.75’’ wingspan. He is always vigilant on the court, and letting him leak out early in transition could do wonders for his offensive confidence. It may be ugly here and there, but when you have a talent of high athleticism with some creative potential, ugly may be worth putting up with. When remembering we are talking about a potential All-Defense level defender, the rewards of even slight offensive improvements could be spectacular.

Nick Smith Jr (RSCI #3, Pick #27 to Charlotte Hornets)

Nick Smith Jr., perhaps more than anyone on this list, put everything on tape at Arkansas that you would want, if you look for it. Most notably, in his 25 point, 6 assist, 4 steal, 3 rebound, 1 block masterpiece versus Kentucky, or similar 20+ point outputs with stats elsewhere versus Alabama, Georgia, UNC Greensboro and Oklahoma. In these games we see the sell for NSJ, quite obvious: he can score on the ball as easily as off the ball, and will work as hard as he can to be positive everywhere else. The passing is the “swing skill” – if he is indeed the PNR maestro he appeared before Arkansas, which I think he might be, Nick has real All-Star upside.

The shot and, more specifically, the touch is where the pitch starts with Smith, lofty for a guard but instead in a player with a 6’9’’ wingspan. That wingspan and touch mean any shot within 12 feet is available as a floater; his vigilance as a scorer and strong technique make him a threat beyond; his ease of fluidity into pull-up make his range endless despite the wiry frame.

As a pure scoring prospect, there are a few items you could ask for that Nick lacks: his first step is okay (made up somewhat by shiftiness), he has little strength (made up somewhat by aggressiveness) and he can be a bit programmatic getting into his actions. But even that is mediated by Nick’s unique head for finding the right action.

Time and again in watching Nick Smith’s tape, his team used him as a sort of offensive cure-all. Need to set up the primary action? He is a suitable custodian for the ball and adept in PNR. Need to come up with a counter quick? Nick is decisive with good enough handle and passing instincts to set up secondary. Shot clock running out? No shot is a bad shot for a shooter of Nick’s level.

Yes, his shooting efficiency was poor at his time with Arkansas. But knee injuries throw off the entire kinetic chain, making splits tough to judge without proper oomf into gather. At EYBL, Smith shot 56% on 8 twos per game and 38% on 5 threes per game. That is, flat out, both elite volume and efficiency, enough to wipe away any doubts. The tape as well shows ideal technique and the ball time and again falling softly off the rim through the net, if touching the rim at all, from every angle and release point imaginable. Buy it.

Rookie Year Remedy: Let Him Take the Hits

I mean this in a quarterback’s sense, as in, it’s tough to get into a rhythm without taking part in the physical aspects of the game. Nick is an aggressive player by nature, a rarity in his aesthetically-minded offensive archetype and beanpole frame. At every level of competition he can be seen helping aggressively when needed (sometimes when not), flailing around the court and picking up a surprising amount of loose balls and even blocks by virtue of activity. Smith struggled to provide this as often at Arkansas as in years prior, limited particularly in his ability to turn corners, previously much quicker.

NSJ needs not just to grow into his frame, but also continue to find ways to maximize his physicality as a way to win when speed does not. Again unusually for type, Smith has proven capable of finishing through traffic, even yards away from the rim with his touch. If he’s able to get to those spots and hold them down more consistently, that touch can do the rest of the work.

Jalen Hood-Schifino (RSCI #20, Pick #17 to Los Angeles Lakers)

The Schifino section might be the shortest as, well, I have the fewest hard takeaways about his game. JHS was extremely unproductive as a freshman with Indiana, in a context I don’t think was particularly unfair to him. While Hood-Schifino looks the part on the court, good stance and technique generally, he is the single least productive one-and-done first round pick in the barttorvik.com database.

JHS stood out at the NBA Combine with his seven-foot wingspan, which, in conjunction with a strong frame makes him a physical presence. However, the physicality stats lag: he only had 4 dunks all season, only rebound 1.6% of opportunities and had very low steal and block rates. He only took 76 free throws and the exact same number of rim attempts. Hood-Schifino survives, rather, on tough shotmaking.

While falling short of Sensabaugh’s midrange dominance, 90 for 216 (42%) is nothing to scoff at, especially considering JHS struggles mightily to create separation. He gets into his shot pocket almost automatically regardless of position, a rare trait. But scoring prospects need easy buckets, and those were few and far between for Jalen. While his finishing touch and creativity is good, he struggled to hit openings, stuck taking difficult rim attempts. This, along with mixed three point results, dropped his true shooting percentage below 50% – a tough pill for a shotmaking prospect.

If, rather, you view JHS as a table-setter, I have qualms as there too. For someone who looks in ready-set position at any given point, Schifino makes a shocking number of careless errors. Whether not executing a pass fully or not concentrating when catching the ball, a 19% turnover rate for someone with fairly basic offensive responsibilities is another red flag.

Finally, the defense. I want my table-setters to get into their opponent’s body, or at least be constantly roaming to use their length. JHS doesn’t really do either of those, evidenced both by his low stock rates and the tape where he’s seen getting disconnected from his man fairly often. The margins are small for this type with plenty of guard competition; JHS’s wingspan stands out, but is he using it?

Rookie Year Remedy: Shoot, Shoot Some More

The promised land for JHS, as well as the Lakers, relies in Hood-Schifino’s tough shotmaking. It is astounding at times how unbothered he is despite have zero breathing room to get a shot off. With a quick, high release, I trust him to get his tough FGA when he wants it, even if easier creation looks never come.

With LeBron on the team, JHS won’t have to table set if he doesn’t need to, and instead can run off of screen after screen to create that separation. His 6.1 threes per 100 possessions will hopefully be the fewest in his career, as 3s > 2s and JHS has no issue launching from distance.

I struggle to see JHS changing his tune as it comes to productive stats as the precedent would be too severe compared to his stats profile at Indiana, but it is still just one season. His pedigree, playing with the top HS and AAU teams in the country, should help him fit in on a win-now team, as he certainly looks like a pro when he steps on the court. But the carelessness is a quick way to be taken out and lose important development reps.

The post Evaluating the 2023 NBA Draft’s “Flawed Freshmen” 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 post Jalen Hood-Schifino appeared first on Swish Theory.