VJ Edgecombe

Valdez (VJ) Edgecombe has been a projected top 5 pick wire to wire in this class. Despite a rocky start to the season, Edgecombe’s status as a blue chip recruit seemed well deserved after a freshman season that placed him in exclusive company.

As much as Bart Torvik queries have become a fraught subject amongst the draft community, when taking an Occam’s Razor approach it is apparent there’s not really a precedent for a player with Edgecombe’s intersection of feel, athleticism, and production becoming an abject failure in the league (barring unforeseen circumstances taking place in the case of Zhaire Smith).

So if Edgecombe has the pedigree and production, what consternation is there with his current standing near the top of the draft? To start, one may point to VJ’s suboptimal finishing at the rim. While Edgecombe ended the season at a solid 60% at the rim, his rim efficiency was largely inflated by his dynamic vertical athleticism and transition frequency. Just under 48% of Edgecombe’s rim-attempts came in transition, while in the halfcourt Edgecombe finished only 49% at the rim and a disconcerting 44% on half-court layups. However, this is not a novel insight; most publications and scouts have noted VJ’s half-court limitations for some time, with his unrefined ballhandling typically being pointed to as the culprit of his unimpressive rim-finishing. Per @henrynbadraft, Edgecombe’s relative weakness at the rim has been present since his time on the grassroots circuit. In the query below of top-50 RSCI players’ AAU statistics over the past 3 years, along with Edgecombe, these were the only players to have <53% on two-point attempts (2PA), <0.6 2PA/TSA (true shot attempt), and <0.1 FTA/TSA.

Of the 5 players here (excluding Edgecombe) to play over a 50% minutes share, their average rim-rate was 20.9% as a freshman. With the exception of VJ, these players were either three-point specialists or jumpshot-oriented creators. With VJ not falling into either bucket he was placed in a precarious position, how does one deploy a blue-chip recruit without a clearly defined offensive skillset? Early in the season, the fit could best be described as ‘trying to fit a square peg into a round hole’. Baylor runs a notoriously ballscreen-heavy offense, finishing this season in the 81st percentile in ‘Pick-and-Roll’ frequency, and over the last 5 years Baylor has never finished lower than the 77th percentile in this playtype.

Operating core ballscreen actions in the middle third of the floor, Edgecombe greatly struggled generating deep, quality paint touches. When asked to create from a standstill against a set defense as frequently as Edgecombe was, his high center of gravity caused issues changing direction off a live dribble, withstanding contact on drives, and altering stride length, all of which are critical components of any downhill driving game. The convergence of Edgecombe’s physical and skill limitations as a primary ballhandler is evident from the clips below.

When you pair this schematic emphasis on running ballscreens with one of the slowest paces in the country (Baylor finished 320/364 teams in Adjusted Tempo) you are left with a team uniquely suited to exacerbating Edgecombe’s weaknesses and suppressing his strengths. I believe this combination is the primary cause of Baylor’s offense being BETTER with Edgecombe on the bench. Per Hoop-Explorer, Baylor’s offense was 7.6 points better per 100 possessions. While the 479 possessions Edgecombe wasn’t on the floor isn’t the most robust sample, the underlying numbers fall in line with what the film suggests. Baylor’s shot quality suffered with Edgecombe running 24% of the team’s PNR actions per Synergy. Not only was Baylor less capable of generating threes and free-throw attempts, the QUALITY of three-point attempts was lower with Edgecombe on the floor, with the team shooting almost 2 less corner threes per 100 possessions.

Even if Edgecombe’s outlook as a downhill creator is replete with red flags, there are still other avenues Edgecombe could take to develop into a star-level offensive player. After all, despite getting off to a rough start shooting this season, Edgecombe’s shooting priors are near stellar. Coming into the year, Edgecombe had shot 39.1% on 274 threes and 79.9% on 134 free-throw attempts. These numbers indicate that Edgecombe developing into a potent off-the-dribble is well within the realm of possibility. And when looking at historical precedent, significant pull-up shooting development may be the most integral component to Edgecombe returning top-5 value. Below are all the players drafted in the lottery since 2010 who were: 6’5 or shorter, with 5 or fewer unassisted two-point makes per 100 possessions, and 30% or more of their two’s assisted (per Bart Torvik)

Virtually all of these players who returned positive expected value based on their draft slot developed into highly effective shooters off the dribble. And where it currently stands, Edgecombe is behind the curve in this respect. Compared to the players in the previous query, Edgecombe finished his pre-NBA season with the lowest volume AND tied for the 2nd worst efficiency on these pull-up twos.

Edgecombe’s lack of comfort shooting off the dribble is apparent on film, and another facet of his game limited by his handle. VJ cannot self-organize off multiple dribbles and take pull-up jumpers on balance currently, and the line between midrange attempts and floaters is frequently blurred when Edgecombe takes these shots.

Again, VJ’s issues shooting off the dribble date back to his pre-NCAA career and are rooted in his biomechanical issues. Edgecombe being a ‘high-hipped’ athlete who struggles decelerating is preventing him from leveraging his impressive straight-line speed to create space off the dribble. VJ’s proclivity for over-striding on drives limits how effectively he can generate power when he transitions into a pull-up jumper.

My current hypothesis is Edgecombe’s difficulty controlling his stride length while driving is what’s responsible for the discrepancy between VJ’s dynamism leaping off 2 feet, where he’s arguably the most explosive player in this draft class, versus 1 foot, where he’s struggled greatly relative to expectations. Baylor’s coaching staff made schematic changes for Edgecombe to improve his on-ball efficacy, from using guard-to-guard Ghost Screens to clear driving lanes…

…to using actions such as ’77 Shallow’ in order to simultaneously beat hedging ballscreen coverages and remove nail-help to aid Edgecombe’s drives.

However, neither adjustment bolstered Edgecombe’s efficiency to the desired extent. So this begs the question, if there’s reason for concern with regards to Edgecombe’s effectiveness as a pull-up shooter AND attacking the basket, is there any reason to believe Edgecombe’s profile warrants his lofty draft projection? As previously mentioned, Edgecombe’s deployment in an extremely ballscreen heavy offense was far from ideal, however his playtype distribution does not paint the full picture of how inconducive Baylor’s offense was for Edgecombe specifically.

The 3-man lineup of VJ Edgecombe, Norchad Omier, and Josh Ojianwuna makes up 22.5% of VJ Edgecombe’s total possessions played this season, however this lineup was on the floor for 26.9% of PNR possessions ran by Edgecombe this season. In Offensive Rating, this 3-man lineup was 22nd out of 25 Baylor lineups that played over 350 possessions, with this 3-man unit’s only saving grace being their relative strength on the offensive glass.

This lineup’s spacing issues only amplified Edgecombe’s aforementioned struggles as a primary ballhandler. Take the clips below, for example. This group of clips displays Baylor running ‘RAM PNP’, a staple of their ballscreen offense, where a player receives an off-ball screen before setting the middle ballscreen and ‘popping’ to the 3-point line. In the first clip, Baylor has the 2 bigs involved in the action, with Norchad Omier first receiving the off-ball screen before setting a ballscreen for Edgecombe. Notice how compacted the spacing is inside the arc, with Omier’s defender completely disregarding the popping Omier.

However, in the following clips, a ‘small’ sets the middle ballscreen for Edgecombe. Even in the first possessions with the action taking place against the same opponent in Tennessee, the improvement in shot quality is apparent.

The double-big lineups’ impact on tape was corroborated by VJ’s PNR data, as well.

Ultimately, this is a minuscule sample of possessions Edgecombe played with the double big lineup, and I do not want to make it seem as though these suboptimal lineups are totally responsible for VJ’s issues as a PNR ballhandler. However, I do think this data is key to realizing that Edgecombe’s outlook as a creator isn’t entirely doomed. Of players with ≥ 150 PNR + Passes possessions, Edgecombe was ranked in the 40th percentile in PPP, but in lineups with only one big Edgecombe’s 0.944 PPP was in the 66th percentile. Over the course of the season Baylor substituted these 3-man ballscreen actions with ‘Empty’ PNRs to ‘clear up’ the picture for Edgecombe on drives and place less strain on his handle. In these less complex ballscreen actions, Edgecombe’s processing (which well outpaces the functionality of his handle at this point) was able to truly shine.

My case for optimism in Edgecombe’s creation ability is relative to the position taken by his greatest detractors. The likelihood of VJ becoming a high-level PNR operator is slim-to-none in my opinion, but this doesn’t preclude the possibility of him becoming a highly valuable offensive player. The use case for VJ Edgecombe offensively just requires a degree of creativity.

For as many questions as I’ve raised regarding the functionality of VJ’s athleticism, there have only been a few players his size to reach certain athletic benchmarks. Below is a query I’ve run on players since 2010, where ‘Team Stock%’ is the share of a team’s steals+blocks a player logged. I decided to use this instead of steal and block rate to account for some noise introduced by team stylistic tendencies.

The only other players to appear alongside Edgecombe are players whose role I’ve termed ‘Utility Guards’, those with the size of perimeter players who can fulfill responsibilities typically associated with frontcourt players. This sort of role is where I see Edgecombe being best utilized. As VJ transitions to the NBA and his on-ball burden lessens, I would hope that Edgecombe is integrated as a stylistic wrinkle versus a featured piece. There may not be a team better at deploying their guards in such a manner than the Boston Celtics. With the acquisition of Jrue Holiday, the Celtics could place teams in conflict without deliberately involving Holiday in actions. By simply stationing Holiday in the Dunker Spot, the Celtics were afforded the luxury of having a player who could function as an outlet for their jumbo creators on drives and consistently win the rebounding battle versus like-sized perimeter players.

In the original ‘Utility Guard’ query I provided, pre-NBA 3-point volume and efficiency were listed. The relevancy of these stats outside of the obvious is the prevalence of the most consistent counter used to neutralize this archetype. I am currently writing this article as the Eastern Conference Finals takes place, and much has been made of Josh Hart’s ineffectiveness in the series, with the Knicks coaching staff going as far as removing Hart from the starting lineup. What has plagued Hart and many of these Swiss army knife players (at least offensively) is the lack of consistent spacing they provide. Opponents have experienced success defending these players with Centers and ignoring them on the perimeter. What makes the prospect of Edgecombe in this role especially tantalizing is the confidence I have in his ability as a spot-up shooter.

Granted, a significant portion of these attempts are from the high-school line, and Edgecombe has shot a paltry 24.4% (19/79) on off-the-dribble 3PA in the same timeframe. But at the same stage of their careers, Edgecombe is significantly further along as a spacer than players of a similar archetype, while also possessing the explosiveness to take advantage of opportunities as a screener like Gary Payton II in the clip below…

Or exploit cross-matches versus bigs in space, as he does to Henri Veesaar in the play below.

And as previously mentioned, Baylor’s PNR-heavy style being centered around smaller guards who couldn’t create advantages eradicated opportunistic scoring from Edgecombe’s shot diet. The few chances Edgecombe has had to attack from the weakside or get downhill versus a tilted floor, he delivered.

Obviously, there’s only so much accommodating a team would want to subject themselves to when it comes to a player drafted as high as VJ will be. However, a player capable of providing lineup and stylistic flexibility without compromising spacing or rebounding is scarcely made available at a rookie deal price point. This archetype’s dependence on high-leverage creators is undeniable, but this era of the NBA reflects the appeal of a prospect like VJ Edgecombe. Sacrificing the size traditionally associated with certain roles in favor of skill can pay massive dividends.

Miles Byrd

Any reservations to be had with Miles Byrd are fairly straightforward; a glance at a query of players with Byrd’s combination of size and scoring inefficiency yields a list almost bereft of long-tenured NBA contributors.

It wouldn’t be entirely off-base to say the only reason the majority of this list was even able to enter the draft pool was due to exceptional high school pedigrees. The obvious throughline between success cases of this query is their high-level defensive aptitude. There is definitely reason to believe Byrd’s defensive capabilities are enough to buoy his NBA prospects, as of the players in the above query, Byrd has the highest Block and Steal rate. To my surprise, however, Byrd’s impact on San Diego State’s defensive efficiency was muted relative to his statistical production on this end of the floor. Per Hoop-Explorer, San Diego State’s defense was only 2.5 points per 100 possessions better with Byrd On Court vs Off. Perhaps most unexpectedly though, SDSU’s Defensive Turnover Rate remained unchanged regardless of whether Byrd was playing or not!

Watching the tape, it is fairly easy to draw conclusions as to what could be behind the discrepancy between Byrd’s stellar event creation numbers, and the On-Off Splits. San Diego State runs an aggressive switching scheme, which incentivizes players to sacrifice ‘sound’ positioning in favor of forcing opponents into congested areas of the floor where they are more prone to committing turnovers. Byrd’s tape is littered with possessions where he is overhelping, or even throwing himself out of position by jumping passing lanes and attempting to create havoc.

Referencing SDSU’s defensive resume, there are two statistics that are key to elucidating Byrd’s directive schematically.

San Diego State was in the Bottom 10 in Opponent 3-point Rate, while leading the nation in Block Rate. It seems Head Coach Brian Dutcher was comfortable with trading off 3-point attempts as long as they were able to pack the paint and prevent their deep-lying shell from being compromised. This philosophy has been a defining trait of the Dutcher era, with SDSU ranking in the top 200 in opponent 3-point rate once in his 7 years at the helm, and outside the top 300 three times, including this year. SDSU’s Block% is relevant to their scheme and Byrd’s defensive evaluation because it empowered Byrd to take risks on the perimeter. If Byrd made an ill-advised gamble and provided the opponent a numerical advantage to attack, they still had to contend with a formidable frontcourt led by Magoon Gwath who finished 4th in the country in Block%.

Synthesizing this information initially led me to take a skeptical approach to Byrd’s defensive translatability. And prompted a less charitable interpretation of instances where Byrd’s point-of-attack defense faltered…

…or Byrd’s lack of strength seemed to be insulated by SDSU’s constant switching.

And while these were valid concerns at the time, taking a more holistic approach to Miles Byrd’s defensive profile incited me to revise my approach. But before delving deeper into the defensive side of things, I believe Byrd’s offense deserves further attention.

The Case for Miles Byrd’s Offense

Of the 68 teams in the NCAA Tournament field, San Diego State was 61st in Adjusted Offensive Rating, surpassing only the four 16 seeds in the field, Bryant, Troy, and Robert Morris in offensive efficiency. Historically speaking, San Diego State under Bryan Dutcher has never been a system conducive to high-octane offenses. A look at SDSU’s offensive statistical profile over the years portrays a team that plays a deliberate style without generating high-quality, schemed looks.

Too often, there’s a false equivalency drawn between slow offense and bad offense. That’s far from the case in my opinion, one only need to look as far as the NCAA and NBA champions in the 2023-24 season, the UConn Huskies and Boston Celtics. Both teams played a laborious style, but with intent. UConn’s meticulously schemed motion offense was incredibly efficient, creating clean looks for their bevy of shooters. Boston’s dominant run through this past season was defined by their relentless matchup hunting and isolation game. San Diego State, though, according to their own coach, is willing to play a much more laissez-faire approach to offense. On the Basketball Immersion Podcast, Dutcher discussed his philosophy on his offense in relation to his defense as “We spend a lot of time on defense. You’re good at what you work at…we might spend 50-60% of practice on defense…Offensively, we play with great freedom. We play with freedom within framework, we have things we try to accomplish but we like high IQ guys that can break out of that at any moment and just make plays.”

Although in many areas of the game flexibility is an admirable trait, in this instance, SDSU’s willingness to grant players freedom offensive autonomy has resulted in a consistently undesirable shot profile. Below is SDSU’s shot profile data under Brian Dutcher, with Near Proximity field goal attempts being defined as layups, dunks, and tip-ins.

Even with the offensive context being subpar, anyone who has read this far is probably looking for a better explanation for Miles Byrd’s offensive shortcomings than ‘the spacing and system were terrible.’ After all, this could be applied to a litany of former prospects. Despite a team’s structural issues, a player shouldn’t be entirely absolved of the product right? In Byrd’s case, though, despite the uninspiring raw efficiency, he finished in the 87th percentile in Offensive On-Off, per cbbanalytics. San Diego State was 8.9 points per 100 possessions better with Byrd on the court, due to his contribution in a few areas.

First, Miles Byrd is a stellar example of the importance of interior passing. Ranking in the 92nd percentile in Rim-Assists/40 minutes and the 96th percentile in the percent of total assists at the rim, on a per-touch basis Byrd was extremely efficient as a playmaker. Without running a high volume of PNR, Byrd routinely displayed a diverse passing vocabulary in the few opportunities he had attacking a tilted defense.

Even though I would consider Byrd’s handle a weakness at the moment, his penchant for playmaking manifested in his schemed possessions as well. The glut of actions drawn up for Byrd were ‘Spanoulis’ or ‘Zoom Chicago’, but he did operate and was effective in a limited sample as a PNR ballhandler, finishing in the 84th percentile in PNR PPP.

What Byrd’s projection on this end will be reduced to, though, will be how consistent a spacer he will become. Ending the season shooting only 30.3% from 3 on a robust 11.7 3PA/100, I am more optimistic Byrd will develop into an effective spacer than the raw numbers indicate. A significant portion of the optimism lies in Byrd’s stellar three-point volume and career 82.8% FT%, while also being rooted in the circumstances brought on by SDSU’s offense. On Guarded 3PA Byrd shot 37.2% (32/86), which was significantly better than the 23.1% (12/52) Byrd shot on Unguarded 3PA. My hypothesis as to how this could have been possible is that half of Byrd’s 3PA were classified as ‘Long Threes’ which per cbbdata are 3PA from 25+ feet. Already lacking in physical strength, oftentimes Byrd was placed in the position of HAVING to take long 3PA when his teammates were incapable of penetrating and breaking the defensive shell on the initial action.

What may be the strongest evidence for optimism in Byrd’s offensive profile is how extensive a creation burden he was tasked with. Over the course of researching relevant data for this piece, I’d realized Byrd’s self-created shot volume stood out amongst similarly sized players from previous drafts. This past season, only 22.9% of Miles Byrd’s two-point attempts were assisted and he produced 7.42 Unassisted 2PA per 100, a shot distribution more in line with guards trusted with generating half-court offense. To gauge how Byrd’s creation compared to similarly sized players, I conducted a (slightly overfitted) query…

….which yielded this list of 72 players since 2010

50th percentile EPM in the NBA this year (regular season) is -1.71 and slightly over half of this list’s 3 Year Peak EPM surpasses this number. Considering the draft capital (or lack thereof) spent on these players, a majority of them outperformed the expected value attributed to their draft slotting. Notably in the mix here are some of the most impressive recent ‘margin wins’ in Naji Marshall, Herb Jones, and Aaron Wiggins. And while there are some significant disappointments (like a Jarrett Culver or Johnny Davis), even some widely considered ‘busts’ such as Evan Turner managed to contribute in the league for a significant period of time. Two shared traits with players unable to stick in the league were:

1. Lacking a complementary offensive skillset (perimeter shooting, connective passing, and other play-finishing traits)
2. An inability to contribute defensively.

As previously outlined, I’m of the mind that San Diego State’s offensive ecosystem deprived Byrd of opportunities to display the former, and in the next section I plan on quelling concerns of the latter issue.

Tying it all together

For all the aforementioned reasons, Miles Byrd and VJ Edgecombe’s profiles are not without their flaws. There are probably plenty of issues with their skill sets that I haven’t mentioned that would make teams wary of drafting them. What these two have in common, and what has been particularly enamoring, is the seamlessness with which they fit into the modern game. Particularly defensively, Edgecombe and Byrd embody traits that I believe are necessary to play in today’s style.

After this season, Miles Byrd found himself in rare company with his defensive production. The list of non-bigs who managed to contribute to elite defense to the degree Byrd did, while maintaining a baseline level of feel, is exceedingly small.

Taking account of the right-most column, zone-heavy teams seem disproportionately represented amongst this group of players, making Byrd’s inclusion even more compelling. Per Synergy, San Diego State only logged 2 (!!) possessions of zone defense this entire season. Circling back to the initial concerns raised about SDSU’s defense and how relevant Byrd’s responsibilities within the scheme would be to what he’ll be asked to do at the next level, I believe SDSU’s scheme is one of the college defenses most analogous to the NBA systems currently in vogue.

Earlier, I had mentioned SDSU’s willingness to switch in conjunction with their tendency to show help early and often as a potential crutch for Miles Byrd, an obstacle in properly evaluating his defense. Originally, I’d thought if I were unable to assess Byrd’s ability to perform in ONE isolated defensive role, whether it be screen navigation, POA defense, or weakside rim-protection, then I’d be unable to determine which defensive role best suited him. The direction defenses in the NBA are heading, though, proves this is an antiquated way of evaluating defensive talent. In the same way competency in dribbling, passing, and shooting has become requisite for incoming NBA players, we have now arrived in an era where personnel need to demonstrate a degree of proficiency in each facet of defense to contribute to elite ’16 game’ basketball.

Of course, no team has exemplified this philosophy more than the prohibitive favorites for this year’s championship, the Oklahoma City Thunder. By compiling a roster full of players who are not only physically capable of executing a variety of defensive roles, but can simultaneously diagnose complex rotations, the Thunder have architected a defense with a singular identity amongst the NBA elite. Similar to San Diego State, the Thunder have no issues helping off of shooters, switching early and often, varying ballscreen coverages, and breaking with conventional defensive principles like helping off the ball-side corner.

While the other participant in this year’s NBA Finals doesn’t play as frenetic a defensive scheme, the Indiana Pacers mirror Oklahoma City in their utilization of early pick-up points in order to extend their pressure and convert a perceived weakness, their size, into a strength.

This kind of defense, which is becoming more and more commonplace, is where both Edgecombe and Byrd should thrive. Both have routinely shown their chops in each ‘phase’ of defense. Role notwithstanding, both were exemplary as point-of-attack defenders.

As previously discussed, SDSU’s scheme gave Byrd carte blanche to trust his instincts and range as a help defender, to consistently great results. Byrd’s activity was pervasive in every area, changing the geometry of the court by altering drive angles as a nail-defender…

…and keeping his team’s defense out of rotation with his sticky screen navigation.

Edgecombe’s deployment wasn’t nearly as fluid as Byrd’s, as Baylor played significantly more zone defense than SDSU (Baylor finished in the 91st percentile in zone frequency), making their defensive identity this season much more conservative. Coming into this season as the 234th-ranked team in average height per KenPom, Baylor didn’t have the luxury of rangy defenders to execute longer, more exotic rotations, so their prerogative was to stay out of rotation entirely and maintain shell integrity. This confined Edgecombe to playing a much more static role than Byrd. Even with a more parochial role, Edgecombe’s hand speed and lateral quickness mirroring players on the perimeter shone.

The instances of cognitive athleticism Byrd and Edgecombe show in the clips above are what make them especially suited for modern defenses. Oklahoma City has become the blueprint by acquiring players with traditionally valued athletic traits, decision making, and reaction times to dial their defensive aggression to the point where they are dictating terms of play to the offense. Recently, a major shift in NFL defenses was made when teams realized offenses struggled playing against 2-high safety alignments, where big-play opportunities were limited and offenses would have to slowly matriculate the ball down the field. I do not find the recent schematic changes made by the OKC Thunder all that different. The Thunder defense, by swarming to the ball and congesting driving lanes, have turned the long-held ‘drive and kick’ logic on its head. Similar to San Diego State, OKC concedes a high volume of 3PA defensively, especially relative to contemporary elite defenses. However, this is by design, by selling out on drives and forcing the ball to travel east-west versus north-south, both teams force longer possessions. In Oklahoma City’s case, the number of defensive playmakers they roster makes each drive by the opponent a tenuous proposition. When a team rosters so many chaos agents on defense, there’s the opportunity cost assumed with each successive drive, that the chance of the driver committing a turnover increases.

The emphasis on turnover generation in convergence with the break from traditional defensive philosophies resulted in NBA defense being ‘up’ this year, with drive volume, secondary assists (an assist made without the passer dribbling before the assist), and offensive rating all declining. While I understand this is a somewhat strained assumption, especially on such a small sample, I truly believe the sustained intensity and creativity we’re seeing in defenses is responsible for this phenomenon.

In SDSU’s case, Miles Byrd was disruptive enough on his own to mimic this effect on opposing offenses. By covering large swaths of ground and making multiple efforts after the initial rotation, Byrd was largely responsible for preventing flow to build within an offense.

By now I am probably starting to sound like a broken record with the continued use of terms like ‘ground-coverage’ and ‘event creation’, but it truly can’t be overstated how essential this is becoming as we transition into what has been aptly termed ‘The Weakest Link Era’ (a phrase coined by the inimitable Owen Phillips). So far, I’ve outlined the kind of player required to play this work-intensive style of defense, but the fact of the matter is that to play this way throughout the regular season and playoffs, you need MORE of this kind of player.

NBA basketball has never been more physically demanding, so it follows that to play a style hinged on range and effort, you’ll need a rotating cast of players to complement your core group. In Oklahoma City’s case, their depth is not only complementary, but ameliorates the weaknesses of many players in their rotation. So many members of the Thunder either currently possess or were at an earlier point designated as half-court deficient players; however, their greatest strength defensively allows them to play in the game states most conducive to efficient offense.

This applies to Miles Byrd and VJ Edgecombe because, irrespective of their offensive limitations, their penchant for creating turnovers will greatly augment the offense of a team, especially one already rostering players with similar defensive talents. The effect both Byrd and Edgecombe had on their respective teams’ transition numbers is instructive as to their value-add offensively.

In Byrd’s case, these transition numbers are especially notable: this is how a player shooting 38% from the field becomes the most impactful player to his team’s offense. San Diego State’s rim rate went from 122nd in the country with Byrd on the court to 293rd with him off. Without Byrd providing a spark in transition, the Aztecs were incapable of generating quality rim attempts in the half-court.

Conclusion

As it currently stands, the NBA is in a transitionary period. Slowly but surely, fans, analysts, and teams alike are acknowledging this era is a far departure from the star-centric league most of us grew to know and love. Now, as depth and flexibility become the focus, and while salary cap restrictions are more punitive than ever, it is paramount that teams get the most out of whatever draft capital they possess to maintain a standard of competitiveness. Otherwise, teams will routinely subject themselves to the whims of the ever-temperamental lottery gods (my condolences go out to fans of the Wizards, Jazz, and Pelicans alike). As I’ve mentioned repeatedly, Miles Byrd and VJ Edgecombe are far from perfect prospects, for as much as I’ve lauded their defensive acumen, even in this area their physical strength could become a significant obstacle which prevents them from being All-Defense caliber performers.

In Edgecombe’s case in particular, I would be surprised if he ended up returning top-4 value, and personally have him ranked 7th at the time of writing. I see VJ developing in a way where he could disappoint relative to expectations on his rookie contract. However, the style both players allow you to play, and the confidence I have in the depth they will provide, anchors my belief that both players have productive NBA careers ahead of them.

The post Contextualizing Production: VJ Edgecombe and Miles Byrd appeared first on Swish Theory.

1. Utah Jazz – Cooper Flagg, Duke

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

Matt Powers

2. Washington Wizards – Dylan Harper, Rutgers

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

Ahmed Jama

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

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

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

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

Roshan Potluri

4. New Orleans Pelicans – VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

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

Tyler Wilson

5. Philadelphia Sixers – Noa Essengue, ULM

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

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

Roshan Potluri

6. Brooklyn Nets – Ace Bailey, Rutgers

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

Corban Ford

7. Toronto Raptors – Khaman Maluach, Duke

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

Ryan Kaminski

8. San Antonio Spurs – Kon Knueppel, Duke

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

Tyler Wilson

9. Houston Rockets – Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

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

Ben Pfeifer

10. Portland Trailblazers – Derik Queen, Maryland

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

Ben Pfeifer

11. Dallas Mavericks – Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

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

Corban Ford

12. Chicago Bulls – Tre Johnson, Texas

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

Larry Golden

13. Atlanta Hawks – Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

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

Ahmed Jama

14. San Antonio Spurs – Jase Richardson, Michigan State

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

Tyler Wilson

15. Oklahoma City Thunder – Carter Bryant, Arizona

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

Maurya Kumpatla

16. Orlando Magic – Danny Wolf, Michigan

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

Ryan Kaminski

17. Minnesota Timberwolves – Labaron Philon, Alabama

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

Joe Hulbert

18. Washington Wizards – Adou Thiero, Arkansas

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

Avinash Chauhan

19. Brooklyn Nets – Asa Newell, Georgia

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

Ahmed Jama

20. Miami Heat – Kam Jones, Marquette

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

Joe Hulbert

21. Utah Jazz – Noah Penda, Le Mans

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

Avinash Chauhan

22. Atlanta Hawks – Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

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

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

Roshan Potluri

23. Indiana Pacers – Nique Clifford, Colorado State

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

Ben Pfeifer

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

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

Maurya Kumpatla

25. Orlando Magic – Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

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

Ryan Kaminski

26. Brooklyn Nets – Ben Saraf, ULM

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

Matt Powers

27. Brooklyn Nets – Bogoljub Markovic, KK Mega

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

Matt Powers

28. Boston Celtics – Nate Bittle, Oregon

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

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

Avinash Chauhan

29. Phoenix Suns – Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

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

Ben Pfeifer

30. Los Angeles Clippers – Alex Condon, Florida

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

Larry Golden

31. Minnesota Timberwolves – Sion James, Duke

Joe Hulbert

32. Boston Celtics – Liam McNeeley, Connecticut

Larry Golden

33. Charlotte Hornets – Javon Small, West Virginia

Ahmed Jama

34. Charlotte Hornets – Walter Clayton Jr., Florida

Ahmed Jama

35. Philadelphia Sixers – Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

Tyler Wilson

36. Brooklyn Nets – Johni Broome, Auburn

Matt Powers

37. Detroit Pistons – Isaiah Evans, Duke

Roshan Potluri

38. San Antonio Spurs – Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

Maurya Kumpatla

39. Toronto Raptors – Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

Ryan Kaminski

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

Joe Hulbert

41. Golden State Warriors – Rocco Zikarsky, Brisbane

Tyler Wilson

42. Sacramento Kings – Boogie Fland, Arkansas

Larry Golden

43. Utah Jazz – Drake Powell, North Carolina

Corban Ford

44. Oklahoma City Thunder – Max Shulga, VCU

Roshan Potluri

45. Chicago Bulls – Will Riley, Illinois

Avinash Chauhan

46. Orlando Magic – Vladislav Goldin, Michigan

Ryan Kaminski

47. Milwaukee Bucks – Koby Brea, Kentucky

Larry Golden

48. Memphis Grizzlies – Egor Demin, BYU

Matt Powers

49. Cleveland Cavaliers – Cedric Coward, Washington State

Maurya Kumpatla

50. New York Knicks – Mark Sears, Alabama

Tyler Wilson

51. Los Angeles Clippers – Tyrese Proctor, Duke

Corban Ford

52. Phoenix Suns – Eric Dixon, Villanova

Avinash Chauhan

53. Utah Jazz – Alex Toohey, Sydney

Larry Golden

54. Indiana Pacers – Jamir Watkins, Florida State

Ben Pfeifer

55. Los Angeles Lakers – Joan Beringer, Olimpija

Roshan Potluri

56. Memphis Grizzlies – Karter Knox, Arkansas

Matt Powers

57. Orlando Magic – Otega Oweh, Kentucky

Ryan Kaminski

58. Cleveland Cavaliers – Hunter Sallis, Wake Forest

Corban Ford

59. Houston Rockets – AK Okereke, Cornell

Maurya Kumpatla

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

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

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke

Do-it-all wing with premium skill and athleticism

2. Dylan Harper, Rutgers

Bruising driving guard and potent scorer

3. Collin Murray-Boyles, South Carolina

Elite playmaking forward on both sides of the ball

4. VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

Explosive scoring guard and lockdown defender

5. Khaman Maluach, Duke

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

6. Derik Queen, Maryland

Creative big-bodied drive threat who can pass

7. Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

Young lead guard with dribble, pass, shoot upside

8. Ace Bailey, Rutgers

Versatile shooting wing with dynamic athleticism

9. Tre Johnson, Texas

Tough shotmaker all over the court

10. Jase Richardson, Michigan State

Three-level scoring guard with quick processing

11. Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

Pull-up maestro with passing creativity

12. Kon Knueppel, Duke

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

13. Asa Newell, Georgia

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

14. Noa Essengue, ULM

Sinewy rim attacker with budding ball skills and defensive versatility

15. Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

Tough freshman PF with strong feel for the game

16. Noah Penda, Le Mans

Menacing wing defender and offensive connector

17. Labaron Philon, Alabama

Gadgety, versatile, productive guard every team could use

18. Miles Byrd, San Diego State

Stocks machine with shooting potential

19. Ben Saraf, ULM

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

20. Bennett Stirtz, Drake

Potentially underrated lead guard up-transfer from Division II

21. Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

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

22. Nique Clifford, Colorado State

Fluid-moving upperclassman who does a little of everything

23. Kam Jones, Marquette

Paint touch machine, three-level scorer who can pass

24. Rasheer Fleming, Saint Joseph’s

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

25. Johni Broome, Auburn

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

26. Danny Wolf, Michigan

Unique ball-handling point center with quick processing skills

27. Liam McNeeley, Connecticut

Three-point threat who attacks closeouts looking to finish strong

28. Carter Bryant, Arizona

Talented freshman wing providing a punch off the bench

29. Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

Big man upperclassman who dominates the paint on both ends

30. JT Toppin, Texas Tech

High motor, high producing rim attacker

31. Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

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

32. Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

Point-of-attack demon with some ball skills

33. Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

Dribble-pass-shoot quick small guard

34. Will Riley, Illinois

Under-developed young wing shooter and passer

35. Adou Thiero, Arkansas

Physical slasher who creates events on defense

36. Joshua Jefferson, Iowa State

Physical defender with some connector chops as a big wing

37. Egor Demin, BYU

Elite passer with inconsistent play against top competition

38. Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

Skilled upperclassman who can shoot and pass from the wing

39. Alex Condon, Florida

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

40. Walter Clayton Jr.

High volume three point shooter who can do some guard things

41. JoJo Tugler, Houston

+12 wingspan for this mobile rim protector

42. Boogie Fland, Arkansas

Game managing shooter and passer

43. Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

Toolsy high motor player with versatility

44. Flory Bidunga, Kansas

Undersized but hyper-athletic rangy big

45. Alex Karaban, Connecticut

Elite shooter and wing defender, national champion

46. Dailyn Swain, Xavier

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

47. Javon Small, West Virginia

Highly productive lead guard essential to WVU

48. Rocco Zikarsky, Brisbane

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

49. Ian Jackson, North Carolina

Pure scoring freshman who can catch fire like few others

50. Bogoljub Markovic, KK Mega

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

51. Drake Powell, North Carolina

Hyperactive freshman defender with shooting potential

52. Tomislav Ivisic, Illinois

Floor-spacing center and ball-mover

53. Chad Baker-Mazara, Auburn

Upperclassman utility wing with a smooth shot

54. Zvonimir Ivisic, Arkansas

PNR roll & pop 7’2” big

55. Max Shulga, VCU

Strong combo guard who can run some PNR

56. Xaivian Lee, Princeton

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

57. Alvaro Folgueiras, Robert Morris

Ultra-versatile big wing hiding in mid majors

58. Eric Dixon, Villanova

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

59. Otega Oweh, Kentucky

Tough-nosed defender and transition threat

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

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

– Ben Pfeifer

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

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

– Maurya Kumpatla

3. Utah Jazz: Dylan Harper, Rutgers

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

– AJ Carter

4. New Orleans Pelicans: Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

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

– Ben Pfeifer

5. Toronto Raptors: Khaman Maluach, Duke

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

– Tyler Wilson

6. Philadelphia 76ers: Asa Newell, Georgia

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

– Ryan Kaminski

7. Brooklyn Nets: VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

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

– Ahmed Jama

8. Chicago Bulls: Jase Richardson, Michigan State

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

– Roshan Potluri

9. San Antonio Spurs: Ace Bailey, Rutgers

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

– Larry Golden

10. San Antonio Spurs: Derik Queen, Maryland

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

– Avinash Chauhan

11. Portland Trailblazers: Noa Essengue, ULM

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

– Roshan Potluri

12. Houston Rockets: Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

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

– Matt Powers

13. Atlanta Hawks: Tre Johnson, Texas

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

– Ahmed Jama

14. Utah Jazz: Kon Knueppel, Duke

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

– AJ Carter

15. Orlando Magic: Danny Wolf, Michigan

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

– Ryan Kaminski

16. Oklahoma City Thunder: Noah Penda, Le Mans

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

– Maurya Kumpatla

17. Dallas Mavericks: Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

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

– Matt Powers

18. Oklahoma City Thunder: Bennett Stirtz, Drake

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

– Maurya Kumpatla

19. Miami Heat: Dailyn Swain, Xavier

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

– Roshan Potluri

20. Minnesota Timberwolves: Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

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

– AJ Carter

21. Indiana Pacers: Ben Saraf, ULM

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

– Matt Powers

22. Brooklyn Nets: Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

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

– Avinash Chauhan

23. Brooklyn Nets: Carter Bryant, Arizona

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

– Avinash Chauhan

24. Atlanta Hawks: Liam McNeeley, Connecticut

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

– Tyler Wilson

25. Washington Wizards: Labaron Philon, Alabama

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

– Ben Pfeifer

26. Orlando Magic: Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

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

– Ryan Kaminski

27. Brooklyn Nets: Kam Jones, Marquette

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

– Larry Golden

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

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

– Tyler Wilson

29. Los Angeles Clippers: Nique Clifford, Colorado State

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

– Larry Golden

30. Phoenix Suns: Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

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

– Matt Powers

31. Boston Celtics: Johni Broome, Auburn

32. Charlotte Hornets: Miles Byrd, San Diego State

33. Minnesota Timberwolves: Flory Bidunga, Kansas

34. Charlotte Hornets: Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

35. Detroit Pistons: Paul McNeil, NC State

36. Philadelphia 76ers: Adou Thiero, Arkansas

37. Brooklyn Nets: Javon Small, West Virginia

38. Sacramento Kings: Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

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

40. Toronto Raptors: Eric Dixon, Villanova

41. Oklahoma City Thunder: Joshua Jefferson, Iowa State

42. Washington Wizards: Egor Demin, BYU

43. Orlando Magic: Boogie Fland, Arkansas

44. Golden State Warriors: JoJo Tugler, Houston

45. Chicago Bulls: Max Shulga, VCU

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

47. Utah Jazz: Alex Toohey, Sydney

48. Washington Wizards: Nate Bittle, Oregon

49. Utah Jazz: Tyrese Proctor, Duke

50. Washington Wizards: JT Toppin, Texas Tech

51. Cleveland Cavaliers: Nolan Winter, Wisconsin

52. Indiana Pacers: Alex Condon, Florida

53. Memphis Grizzlies: Isaiah Evans, Duke

54. Los Angeles Lakers: Curtis Jones, Iowa State

55. New York Knicks: Terrance Arceneaux, Houston

56. Phoenix Suns: Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

57. Orlando Magic: Otega Oweh, Kentucky

58. Houston Rockets: Rocco Zikarsky

59. Cleveland Cavaliers: Braden Smith, Purdue

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

1. Washington Wizards: Cooper Flagg, Duke

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

– Tyler Wilson

2. New Orleans Pelicans: Dylan Harper, Rutgers

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

– Ryan Kaminski

3. Utah Jazz: Derik Queen, Maryland

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

– Larry Golden

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

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

– Ahmed Jama

5. Charlotte Hornets: Thomas Sorber, Georgetown

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

– Maurya Kumpatla

6. Portland Trailblazers: Ace Bailey, Rutgers

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

– AJ Carter

7. Oklahoma City Thunder: VJ Edgecombe, Baylor

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

– Roshan Potluri

8. Brooklyn Nets: Jeremiah Fears, Oklahoma

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

– Matt Powers

9. Detroit Pistons: Asa Newell, Georgia

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

– Joe Hulbert

10. Chicago Bulls: Kasparas Jakucionis, Illinois

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

– Larry Golden

11. Sacramento Kings: Liam McNeeley, UConn

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

– Ryan Kaminski

12. San Antonio Spurs: Jase Richardson, Michigan State

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

– Maurya Kumpatla

13. Atlanta Hawks: Tre Johnson, Texas

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

– AJ Carter

14. Oklahoma City Thunder: Noah Penda, Le Mans

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

– Roshan Potluri

15. Indiana Pacers: Johni Broome, Auburn

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

– Ahmed Jama

16. San Antonio Spurs: Kon Knueppel, Duke

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

– Maurya Kumpatla

17. Oklahoma City Thunder: Noa Essengue, Ulm

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

– Roshan Potluri

18. Golden State Warriors: Egor Demin, BYU

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

– Ahmed Jama

19. Houston Rockets: Khaman Maluach, Duke

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

– Avinash Chauhan

20. Utah Jazz: Boogie Fland, Arkansas

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

– Larry Golden

21. Brooklyn Nets: Labaron Philon, Alabama

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

– Matt Powers

22. Orlando Magic: Kam Jones, Marquette

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

– Ryan Kaminski

23. Orlando Magic: Donnie Freeman

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

– Ryan Kaminski

24. Brooklyn Nets: Ben Saraf, Ulm

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

– Avinash Chauhan

25. Brooklyn Nets: Darrion Williams, Texas Tech

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

– Matt Powers

26. Dallas Mavericks: Nolan Traore, Saint-Quentin

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

– Tyler Wilson

27. Memphis Grizzlies: Tahaad Pettiford, Auburn

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

– Ben Pfeifer

28. Los Angeles Clippers: Nique Clifford, Colorado State

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

– Tyler Wilson

29. Boston Celtics: Hugo Gonzalez, Real Madrid

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

– Ben Pfeifer

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

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

– Larry Golden

31. Boston Celtics: Rocco Zikarsky, Brisbane

32. Charlotte Hornets: Ryan Kalkbrenner, Creighton

33. Minnesota Timberwolves: Miles Byrd, San Diego State

34. Detroit Pistons: Will Riley, Illinois

35. Charlotte Hornets: Jacob Cofie, Virginia

36. Toronto Raptors: Chaz Lanier, Tennessee

37. Dallas Mavericks: Anthony Robinson II, Missouri

38. Brooklyn Nets: Danny Wolf, Michigan

39. Washington Wizards: Alex Karaban, UConn

40. Indiana Pacers: Flory Bidunga, Kansas

41. San Antonio Spurs: Yaxel Lendeborg, UAB

42. Chicago Bulls: Tomislav Ivisic, Illinois

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

44. Oklahoma City Thunder: Xaivian Lee, Princeton

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

46. Golden State Warriors: Juni Mobley, Ohio State

47. Los Angeles Lakers: Adou Thiero, Arkansas

48. Cleveland Cavaliers: Bogoljub Markovic, KK Mega

49. Atlanta Hawks: Jamir Watkins, Florida State

50. Washington Wizards: Bennett Stirtz, Drake

51. Washington Wizards: Dink Pate, Mexico City

52. Charlotte Hornets: JoJo Tugler, Houston

53. Orlando Magic: Jalil Bethea, Miami

54. Dallas Mavericks: KJ Lewis, Arizona

55. Memphis Grizzlies: Tucker Devries, West Virginia

56. New York Knicks: Drake Powell, UNC

57. Houston Rockets: Max Shulga, VCU

58. Orlando Magic: Otega Oweh, Kentucky

59. Cleveland Cavaliers: Milan Momcilovic, Iowa State

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