(I realize with the boards being as dead as they are, and with very few people watching college basketball here anymore, this may end up just being me talking to myself in this post, lol. But it's the best way for me to organize some of my thoughts on these guys, and I know at least a few folks here are always interested in reading about the prospects before the draft. So I'll keep this tradition alive.)

I'll list the prospects, you list your thoughts, as detailed or as basic ("he'll be good"/"he'll be sorry") as you want. As meticulously bias-free as possible or as blindly agenda-driven as you want.

Get on record before these guys play a single NBA game as to how you think they'll pan out. Stake claims, "buy stock," etc.

BUT DON'T BE LATE.

Insanely reductive, but imagine a 6'8 Ben Simmons who has alpha mentality and can shoot 40% from 3 on high volume, and you're getting the idea. He can be your primary scorer, or he can be a terrific facilitator with mismatch height. He's a multi-positional defender with high IQ who's always in the right position. He made multiple end-of-game clutch baskets at Oklahoma State while double and triple teamed.

He showed on Montverde that he can lead an insanely talented roster, facilitate, share the wealth, keep everyone happy, and win. And he carried the load on an Oklahoma State team with very limited talent, dragging them as their primary weapon nearly singlehandedly to a 4 seed. He's just a winner, through and through.

I've heard a couple people whispering that it should be between a couple of guys for the #1 pick, but I think those people are just mining for clicks. Cade is the clear #1 pick, the safest pick for a team looking for their franchise star by a landslide.

>Insanely reductive, but imagine a 6'8 Ben Simmons who has
>alpha mentality and can shoot 40% from 3 on high volume, and
>you're getting the idea. He can be your primary scorer, or he
>can be a terrific facilitator with mismatch height. He's a
>multi-positional defender with high IQ who's always in the
>right position. He made multiple end-of-game clutch baskets at
>Oklahoma State while double and triple teamed.
>
>He showed on Montverde that he can lead an insanely talented
>roster, facilitate, share the wealth, keep everyone happy, and
>win. And he carried the load on an Oklahoma State team with
>very limited talent, dragging them as their primary weapon
>nearly singlehandedly to a 4 seed. He's just a winner, through
>and through.
>
>I've heard a couple people whispering that it should be
>between a couple of guys for the #1 pick, but I think those
>people are just mining for clicks. Cade is the clear #1 pick,
>the safest pick for a team looking for their franchise star by
>a landslide.

There's a very strong chance that they get three lottery picks in this draft alone, four first rounders this year alone, and at least another two first rounders in the next two drafts. Just an absurd collection of talent.

>There's a very strong chance that they get three lottery
>picks in this draft alone, four first rounders this year
>alone, and at least another two first rounders in the next two
>drafts. Just an absurd collection of talent.

https://www.maxpreps.com/high-schools/montverde-academy-eagles-(montverde,fl)/basketball/all_time_roster.htm

Moses Moody might be another top 10 pick..they need to be investigated , how the fuck do we not get players like that but ARKANSAS? does.

I hate college basketball.

I think this team has them on depth, but that Simmons/Russell/Embiid trio is hard to beat in terms of purely top three.

>can shoot 40% from 3 on high volume

who does this currently in the league not named Steph Curry?

unfortunately this kid is probably going to struggle on a bad Detroit team

There’s nearly 50 NBA players a season shooting 3 or more 3s per game making 40+%. Nearly two dozen making 40+% on 6+ attempts per game.

Did you not know that?

Even if you don’t think he hits 40% for his career, if you adjust it to 38% from 3 on the volume he’ll shoot… that’s still fantastic. The point is the same regardless of number: dude can actually shoot, and dude wants to take the shots. Combining that with his skill set is formidable.

If you don’t think he’s that franchise type of guy, by all means, let it be known.

>There’s nearly 50 NBA players a season shooting 3 or more
>3s per game making 40+%. Nearly two dozen making 40+% on 6+
>attempts per game.
>
>Did you not know that?
>
>Even if you don’t think he hits 40% for his career, if you
>adjust it to 38% from 3 on the volume he’ll shoot…
>that’s still fantastic. The point is the same regardless of
>number: dude can actually shoot, and dude wants to take the
>shots. Combining that with his skill set is formidable.
>
>If you don’t think he’s that franchise type of guy, by all
>means, let it be known

You’re mostly right but I’m here to point out as usual that youve been burned for years citing college 3 for nba prospects. It’s a hole different shot in the pros and the game is mostly played differently— though over the last 2-3 there’s been more confluence

>You’re mostly right but I’m here to point out as usual that youve been burned for years citing college 3 for nba prospects.

The biggest burns I've faced on this have been players who shoot 3s well but who shot free throws poorly. But Cade shot 85% on nearly 6 attempts a game from the free throw line. I don't think he's that guy.

Outside of that specific category? I think the majority of players who shoot free throws very well and college 3s well correlate to shooting 3s generally well at the next level. There are exceptions, obviously, but college guys who shoot 40%+ from 3 and 85%+ from FT tend to largely have a positive correlation as 3 point shooters in the NBA.

On top of that, considering that Cade faced so many double teams and *still* shot 40% from 3? I mean, this isn't a Justise Winslow popping wide open college 3s at a 40% clip. Cade was doing it all. I have zero concerns there, and nor should anyone who actually watched him play imo.

>There’s nearly 50 NBA players a season shooting 3 or more
>3s per game making 40+%. Nearly two dozen making 40+% on 6+
>attempts per game.
>
>Did you not know that?
>
>Even if you don’t think he hits 40% for his career, if you
>adjust it to 38% from 3 on the volume he’ll shoot…
>that’s still fantastic. The point is the same regardless of
>number: dude can actually shoot, and dude wants to take the
>shots. Combining that with his skill set is formidable.
>
>If you don’t think he’s that franchise type of guy, by all
>means, let it be known.

on a bad Detroit team no way he shoots that well

Long term, he projects as a strong 3 point shooter.

And again, even if he's merely an above average NBA 3 point shooter, that's still incredible when combined with his myriad other skills.

>Did you not know that?

>
>>Did you not know that?
>

For some content, here are the KenPom rankings for USC under Andy Enfield the last six seasons: 49, 53, 51, 82, 55... 6. The scheme didn't change, the coaching didn't change, the talent level beyond Mobley didn't change-- in fact, the guards were less talented than normal. But Mobley by himself took a team that usually hovers around 50th in the country... to 6th.

Mobley's a stud center, on that Towns/Ayton/Embiid level coming out of college. Honestly even better than Ayton in college as an all-around player. First off, the defense-- he's just so fluid, so smooth, so quick even away from the rim. He's an exceptional rim protector (in this draft, only Isaiah Jackson had a higher block rate), but he can also easily defend in a scheme that switches all 5, and he knows where to be to help. This is the type of big man who can make All-Defense teams before the end of his rookie contract if all goes accordingly.

Usually these sorts of bigs struggle on offense... not Mobley. He's got really good handles for a big, he's a good passer as a big, and he even shot 30% from 3 on over an attempt per game in college, so there's potential for him as a pick and pop guy. He even showed a little bit of shot creation potential as well, even though that's not necessarily who he is at present. So yeah, this body with this skill means All-Star upside. He'd have gone #1 last season.

My only *small* concern-- he's not today the sort of talkative alpha guy you may want as your franchise player. He communicates well, he seems like a great kid, but he's not currently the "give me the ball!" type of guy. (His brother seemed a bit more demonstrative for USC last year, honestly.) He's very young, so that could change, but especially in today's NBA, he feels like the sort of guy who would benefit best from playing alongside an elite guard leader. It's a perimeter game nowadays anyway. That would allow Mobley to do what he does best: defend, pass, create mismatches, do a little shooting, help your team win.

If, say, Houston takes him at 2, I'm not convinced he's the guy to throw the team on his back right away, but if, say, Toronto gets him at 4? Mobley's the guy to put them back over the edge into the playoffs Year 1 imo.

Too chill for me but I guess he can turn his motor up a notch.

technically that sounds like Ayton, too

Early on I see him more of a stretch 4 who can grow into a 5. To my eyes he seems so "small." but he has that wingspan. I think Houston takes him because its kind of part of their brand at this point to draft top Center prospects. He also fills a need, even with Wood there.

I think thats a solid core to have with KPJ, Wood, and Mobley. If nothing else its a fun team.



He isn't alpha and I think he'll take a few years and the right system to develop -- but if the team is patient with him he can be a really good developing player. He is just so good and skilled at everything for his size. The floor is someone like Serge Ibaka and I think the ceiling if he can get time to mature skillwise and bodywise -- would be Embiid.

Embiid has shown quite the personality -- but he was nowhere like he is now at Kansas.



>For some content, here are the KenPom rankings for USC under
>Andy Enfield the last six seasons: 49, 53, 51, 82, 55... 6.
>The scheme didn't change, the coaching didn't change, the
>talent level beyond Mobley didn't change-- in fact, the guards
>were less talented than normal. But Mobley by himself took a
>team that usually hovers around 50th in the country... to 6th.
>
>
>Mobley's a stud center, on that Towns/Ayton/Embiid level
>coming out of college. Honestly even better than Ayton in
>college as an all-around player. First off, the defense-- he's
>just so fluid, so smooth, so quick even away from the rim.
>He's an exceptional rim protector (in this draft, only Isaiah
>Jackson had a higher block rate), but he can also easily
>defend in a scheme that switches all 5, and he knows where to
>be to help. This is the type of big man who can make
>All-Defense teams before the end of his rookie contract if all
>goes accordingly.
>
>Usually these sorts of bigs struggle on offense... not Mobley.
>He's got really good handles for a big, he's a good passer as
>a big, and he even shot 30% from 3 on over an attempt per game
>in college, so there's potential for him as a pick and pop
>guy. He even showed a little bit of shot creation potential as
>well, even though that's not necessarily who he is at present.
>So yeah, this body with this skill means All-Star upside. He'd
>have gone #1 last season.
>
>My only *small* concern-- he's not today the sort of talkative
>alpha guy you may want as your franchise player. He
>communicates well, he seems like a great kid, but he's not
>currently the "give me the ball!" type of guy. (His brother
>seemed a bit more demonstrative for USC last year, honestly.)
>He's very young, so that could change, but especially in
>today's NBA, he feels like the sort of guy who would benefit
>best from playing alongside an elite guard leader. It's a
>perimeter game nowadays anyway. That would allow Mobley to do
>what he does best: defend, pass, create mismatches, do a
>little shooting, help your team win.
>
>If, say, Houston takes him at 2, I'm not convinced he's the
>guy to throw the team on his back right away, but if, say,
>Toronto gets him at 4? Mobley's the guy to put them back over
>the edge into the playoffs Year 1 imo.

Him and Jarrett Allen together are formidable.

Great athlete, great skill, but above all else is his feel. He rarely ever looked sped up at the college level like so many of even the best freshmen do. He's just exceptionally patient. The counterargument here could be "well, he was surrounded by more talent than any other freshman in the NCAA, so he could afford to be patient," and, okay, fair argument. But I suspect more likely than not it translates, largely because his feel is just so advanced for his age. Very few OAD PGs have that natural feel-- he might be top 5-8 of the decade in that regard.

He's also a strong on-ball defender, a high motor energy player on that end... which, again, for PGs with his offensive talents, you just so rarely see that combination. On top of all of that, he's clearly the guy who wants the ball in the big moment, a true alpha dog on the perimeter. The one concern I've heard is his perimeter jump shot... but I'm less concerned than those who've griped about this. He shot 34% from 3 on the season, which isn't great... but he shot 38% from 3 on 4 attempts per game against Tier A and B opponents, and in the Tier A games, the biggestt games? He shot 43% from 3 on over 4 attempts a game. And that was in 13 games, which compared to other players in the draft is a good sample size. (Cade, by comparison, played 15 Tier A games. And, to Cade's credit, shot just shy of 40% on over *7* attempts per game in those.)

He's one of four players I'd have taken above LaMelo and Edwards in last year's draft. He just feels like the type of player who's very high floor but still has star potential. And if he ends up in Toronto, as many people are projecting, he'd be genuinely the *perfect* backcourt pairing with VanVleet.

>He's one of four players I'd have taken above LaMelo and
>Edwards in last year's draft.

wow, really? who are the other 3?

The fourth... truthfully, I don't think I've watched enough of Jalen Green to definitively say I'd have taken him over them. That said, Green was better in the G-League than Edwards was in college. Edwards is stronger, more of a bully than Green, but Green is a better shooter, better defender, better passer, and honestly probably the better athlete.

As for taking these guys over Melo... I was higher on Melo than some, but coming into the draft, there's no denying that there were questions. He was a straight-up bad shooter. He made a lot of bad decisions forcing the issue. He was an abysmal defender. Now, I still thought he should've gone #1 overall, because the upside was absurd, and he was the highest ceiling prospect in the draft. But I have fewer questions going into the draft about Suggs and Green than I did going into the draft about Melo.

Now, if you were asking me whether I'd pick one of these guys today or have Melo or Edwards today, knowing what I know now? Yeah, the only one I'd even entertain is Cade. But going into the respective drafts, if these four guys were on the same timeline as Melo and Edwards, I think at least three and probably all four of the guys this year would've gone above Melo and Edwards.

...and DOESN'T trade Spicy P, they back

Was trying to think of a good player comparison, and I think Zach LaVine is where I've settled. Monster athlete, one of the best in the draft, insanely quick twitch. Can score from any level, can pull up, can close strong, can stroke off the catch. Decent passer and playmaker. Defense is probably more potential right now than reality, but he showed in flashes the ability to lock down 1 through 3 at a pro level with his speed and athleticism.

And when you remember LaVine at 18 wasn't the scorer or the defender in the Pac-12 that Green at 18 was in the G-League... it's hard not to get excited. He would've easily been a Top 2 pick last draft, maybe #1 overall. Scoring 18 PPG in the G-League at such a young age is just really, really hard to ignore.

I'd like to see his shooting get a little less streaky, I'd like the decision making to improve, and I'd like the defense to be consistent... but these are definitely all things one can chalk up to youth and a huge leap in opposition talent. I think worst case scenario, he ends up the type of guy who's a 15+ PPG scorer but not much else. Best case scenario, there's obvious All-Star talent here.

Like, if you think Kuminga can shoot the ball, then he's an All-Star caliber talent. Terrific wing size, great strength and body control for his age. Scored most efficiently in the G-League on cuts and physical force, which is pretty impressive considering he's playing against players 5-10 years older than him. There's also his defensive profile-- on ball, he could potentially guard 1 through 4, maybe even small ball 5s.

That said, I don't love his skills at the moment. He's not a shooter right now, especially off the bounce, and he doesn't have the touch you'd think a prospect of his hype would have. Again, it's the G-League, so it's a huge step up in competition, but he shot under 40% from the field, under 25% from 3, and under 65% from the FT line. It's not like his form is completely broken, but he's just not a shooter right now. He's also not a passer at all, so... that combination of problems is a problem on offense. Incredible raw talent, but right now he's just a really good driver who can't shoot or pass.

Also, off ball on defense, he loses focus. He's pretty awesome on ball, but from the admittedly small sample size I have of watching him play, he struggles to stay engaged sometimes when the ball's not in his hand or when the ball's not in front of him on defense. So he allowed a bunch of back cut layups and things of that nature defensively, which... isn't great for a guy whose calling card really should be his defense at this point.

I still think you take him Top 6 or 7, because there just aren't a lot of players with his type of obvious star potential in this draft. And again, if you think he can shoot 3s at a 36% clip and FTs at a 75+% clip one day, then he's almost certainly an All-Star, because his driving ability is potent, and he'll have serious mismatches if teams can't just sag off him. But if you can't shoot, can't pass, and can't play team defense entering the league, then you're liable to see some real growing pains. Like, Scottie Barnes can't shoot, but I know he can pass, he can play team D, and he can play with consistent energy on or off ball. But you know, it was a COVID bubble and a jump to the G-League, maybe you have to take some of the struggles with a grain of salt. I don't know.

He genuinely played PG at FSU at 6'9 and 225 lbs. Try to throw a guy his size on him? Barnes has the speed, handles, and quick lateral mobility to get around you. Try to throw a guard on him? Barnes will just flat out bully him. He's definitely a matchup nightmare. And his passing is exceptional, not just for his size but for this draft class in general. He's one of those guys with elite feel for the game, where you sense he's always in control.

He's also easily one of the highest IQ defenders in the draft. Not just a terrific on-ball defender, but great off-ball, high motor at all times, and absolutely disruptive with his long arms and timing. He's also probably the only player in the draft who can genuinely guard 1 through 5. There just aren't many NBA players with his combination of length, strength, speed, motor, and IQ on both ends.

The problem is, of course, that he can't shoot. I know ThaTruth called him "broke Ben Simmons" in the other post, and while I think that might be a reasonable jab at what his floor could be, Barnes always plays with high motor, something that can't be said about Simmons (certainly not Simmons coming out of college, anyway). And much like Simmons, if you think Barnes can develop even an NBA average jump shot and free throw stroke, then he's probably an All-Star, the sort of player that be can your franchise guy.

Even if he can't ever shoot, I still think he can be a Draymond Green type, where he's limited away from the rim, but he's just so high IQ and high energy and versatile that he helps you find ways to secure the big wins, a great culture guy and a great tone setter. There's no chance he slides to Golden State at 7, but man, I'd love to see it happen. If I'm a team looking to try to win sooner rather than later, I'd easily take Barnes over Kuminga.

in the league, unless Barnes ends up on that team with those players I can't see him having similar success

he was immediately the guy I wanted to pick because he made me think of Bam and Donkeylips, but unlike the latter, he had some SPEEEEEEEEEEEED.

watch OKC get him though

His range is iffy, but time in the gym will fix that.

Can finish at the rim with both hands, has the potential to be an above average defender.

Ball handling is better than advertised...but because of his frame, he can be pressured. The extra year to get in the weight room is really what I thought he should do, but he wasn't going to gain anything else learning from Hurley.

He is somewhere between Rip and Lamb....better than Jeremy but not as tough as Rip. If he lands on the right team he'll be fine in a couple of years...if not...he'll bounce around like Lamb.

He's got to knock down 3s at a higher clip at the next level to keep teams honest. He's so brilliant at getting to and finishing at the rim, and he's got a knack for knocking down some big off-the-dribble shots in the midrange too... but teams will just go under screens and sag off him for the first few seasons at the next level until he proves he can make 3s consistently.

Other concerns: he's not good at creating for others right now, so he can't really serve as a secondary ball handler, which more and more teams want from their 2 guard. He averages 3.1 assists per 100 possessions for his career at UConn, which... yes, they didn't have a ton of guys around him, but that sucks. (Compare that to Anthony Edwards, who also isn't a very good/willing passer, and who had *way less* talent around him at Georgia... who put up 3.4 assists per 100 possessions.) I also don't think Bouknight was as good an off-ball defender as he was on-ball, but that can be fixed with experience and the right system.

But yeah, if he wants to be more than a bench scorer, he's gotta have two of the three of (a) good 3 point shooting, (b) good passing, (c) good overall defense. I'm not convinced the passing gets there, so the swing skill really will be that perimeter shot. If he can shoot at, say, a 36%+ clip consistently, I think he could be an NBA starter. Otherwise, yeah, Jeremy Lamb journeyman status-- not a knock, that's still a decade long NBA career, but considering he'll probably be drafted Top 10, I'm sure people want more from him.

that Mo Wagner could be a solid starter on a competitive team

some of those same folks are in this post but I bet they won't comment on this lol

He's got a more clearly defined role in today's NBA, because unlike Mo, he's got great lateral quickness and is switchable on D. Defense was his calling card at Michigan-- he was great on-ball, he was elite off-ball. His instincts are among the better defensive instincts for a wing in this draft. He's also a really good passer for a 6'9 wing, doesn't turn it over much,

The 3 point shot is the big swing skill here, and I think it projects well despite shooting 34% last year from 3-- he's a great FT shooter, and his shot ran hot-and-cold rather than hovering consistently around that 34% mark. If he ends up in a system that can help him develop better consistency on that 3 point shot, I think he's the sort of role player that could start for a lot of teams.

So if you think he can't shoot, he's an 8th/9th man journeyman type. If you think he can shoot, he's starter/sixth man type in a clearly defined and coveted role in today's NBA. I'd bank on the latter, personally. But either way, he's really different than Mo, lol.

Keon is maybe the best athlete in the draft, straight up-- elite leaping ability (smashed the combine record for vertical leap), elite burst, great length, great speed. But, much like Jaylen Brown coming out of college, his jumpshot is non-existent at present, and his handles aren't up to snuff for NBA standards. While he's one of the better on-ball defenders in the draft, he still has some discipline issues off-ball, and same goes for the offense when the ball's not in his hands.

I said this about Jaylen in the 2016 Justivity post about some of my concerns: "It won't matter if he can make a 3-pointer at a 35%+ clip and get even harder to stop going to the rack. If he fixes those, I'd totally believe that he could be a starter for a long time, and maybe even have All-Star potential... but that's a ways away from where he is now." I feel the same about Keon. Now, it worked out beautifully for Jaylen (shooting 38% from 3 for his career!), but it could've easily not gone that way.

If you told me Keon develops a 38% 3-point shot in the NBA, I'd tell you his All-Star potential going forward is real. If it's 35%? Maybe more like Miles Bridges. 33% or lower? I struggle to see a world in which he starts. All depends on if you think he can shoot. I'll probably have him lower on my big board than most. (But worth pointing out I had Jaylen Brown lower than most too!)

and he gets to his spots to set folks up.

While he may be a bit small for the point position, I think Davion Mitchell is a smart, high-motor, quick athlete who likes to make his name on the defensive end. In an increasingly point guard driven league, I think having a guy who's a skilled table setter, a strong defender, and a terrific finisher with blow-by speed... is of notable value.

I *do* have some questions about the jump shooting, though. He's a career 65% FT shooter (64% this year, only 53% in Tier A and B games), and he shot 30% from 3 in his two seasons before this one. Mitchell got a lot of very open looks playing in an offense with Butler and Teague, and I kind of wonder just how fluky his 45% 3 point average this year is. There's no question it's fluky... but is it "he's improved but is more like a 38% 3 point shooter right now" fluky, or is it "he's more like a 33-35% 3 point shooter right now" fluky?

Look, either way, he's likely a good enough shooter to keep defenses at least marginally honest-- and if that's not true at first, he's a really hard worker and high character kid, and I don't doubt he can be at least an NBA average 3 point threat. Combine that with the defense and the passing, and I think he'd be a really nice fit off the bench on a team looking to win now, with some eventual starter upside. Maybe if he can make the 40+% 3PT shot a long term reality, he can become a real star type of guy... but I suspect that's a bigger ask than last year's numbers signify.

That said, as I say every year, PG is the hardest position for me to predict, especially guys who don't have strong NBA size. Donovan Mitchell couldn't shoot in college and he became a star, because he found the right system. Davion's such a dog, who knows, maybe he could find some of Donovan's magic. I'd probably take him in that 11-15 range.

He's 6'6 with a 6'11 wingspan. He shot 36% from 3 (38% in conference play) and 81% from the FT line (85% in conference play), so the stroke is good. He was also their primary perimeter threat, so a lot of his shots were tough by necessity-- I think there's absolutely 40% shooting upside here once he's surrounded by stars.

He's also a really good defender on ball, using his size to his advantage on the perimeter and moving his feet well. He doesn't have elite speed or athleticism, but I think he'd still function well in a switchable scheme.

I don't think there's serious star potential here, but the pitch is obvious. He may not have the highest ceiling, but he does have a really high floor. His worst case scenario is, like, bench 3-and-D guy. Which still has clear value. His best case scenario is the 3-and-D guy who serves to help spread the floor for a title contender's 2 or 3 stars. He'd thrive in that role. I've got to think teams like New Orleans and Charlotte should give him a very real look at 10 and 11... and if he slips anywhere beyond that, I suspect someone's getting a steal.

major upside for whoever gets him

If Pop can somehow steal him for the Spurs, he becomes an all-star.

He just started playing basketball at age 15, and he's 19 today, so he still has to figure out, y'know, how to play basketball. But hooooooly shit, the upside is just so unreal.

- He'd be one of the most athletic 6'11 guys in the NBA right away.
- Phenomenal leaper, great lateral quickness, great speed for his size. Moves fluidly too.
- Looks like he can shoot-- still a work in progress, but passes the eye test. Smooth release for a 6'11 guy, and he's even shown some propensity to shoot off the dribble and in midrange.
- Terrific on-ball defender. Off-ball definitely a work in progress, but again, he started organized basketball four years ago-- he's got the length and quickness to be insanely disruptive at the rim and on closeouts on the perimeter.
- More than anything, he has that holy shit factor, where he busts out plays someone like him just... shouldn't be able to do. Like making a smooth Euro step around defenders to a reverse layup, or crossing up a wing defender before popping a 3, or just navigating traffic on a dribble drive to a slam. People his size, with 4 years of experience, shouldn't be able to do the things he does.

So I don't doubt he won't be able to help a team win for the next 2-3 years. But put him on a team that's going to take their time with him-- the Thunder at 16 would be *perfect* if he falls that far-- and he absolutely has massive potential. Guys with his combination of size, athleticism, and raw skill at both ends just don't come around too often. Worst case, he's, like, Robert Williams-esque. Best case, he's Robert Williams with better speed, handles, switchability, and perimeter game... and you've gotta think that's an All-Star if that comes to pass. This is the sort of "could be Giannis-esque" upside swing that you just have to take if you're a team picking in the teens who won't be in serious playoff contention for the next few years-- especially if you're a small market team.

That’s all I can see.

Dude was a few free throws away from a 50-40-90 season last year... and until a complacent stretch during some blowouts in the WCC, he seriously looked like he could've had a 50-50-90 season. Which, on the volume of 3s he takes, is absolutely preposterous. And before people say "what about the competition?"... 13 of Gonzaga's 32 games were Tier A competition, and in those games, he actually shot *better* than he did on the season-- over 44% from 3 on over 7 attempts per game. For his entire career, he shot over 42% from 3 on high volume against Tier A opponents. Dude can just flat out stroke it. There's no better catch-and-shoot player in the draft-- and he's one of the best catch-and-shoot guys in the last few drafts.

He's not going to be a great defender next level-- he's got good size and moves his feet well, but he's not a plus athlete-- but he's a better defender than, say, Joe Harris. And we've seen the value of Joe Harris in the pros-- he's led the NBA in 3P% two of the last three years. And there's really no question that Corey Kispert as a college player was a much better shooter than Joe Harris as a college player.

So he's the perfect pick for a team that needs shooting, especially a team looking to win now. The last two games of the season didn't go Kispert's way, so I think his stock has dipped a little, but I would've considered him a serious threat to go Top 10 during the season. He's absolutely in my Top 15 at lowest, and as long as you draft him to play his role, not to be a star, then he will absolutely shine.

I'm curious your thoughts on him.

It's easy to just toss out this season for Ziaire.

- no preseason
- hurt his knee in the fall
- Stanford was insanely stringent on COVID, so way fewer facilities than most schools
- had to sit out a chunk due to COVID issues
- had *two* deaths in the family that he missed time for

And he was never really the same after his extended absence... so I'm inclined to just say "fuck it, don't judge any of this game tape."

But here's what I think from the few early games I saw and the few HS games I saw him play:

- great wing size. combined with athleticism, he should be a disruptive defender on the wing.
- good feel for the game. not a point forward or anything, but could maybe even do some secondary playmaking.
- not a very good shooter last year... but I don't *hate* the shot. I think questioning it would be reasonable... but I also think of the big wings in the first round of the draft, guys like Kuminga, Barnes, Franz Wagner, Jalen Johnson... Williams is the best shooter off the bounce by a fairly good margin and is at worst the second best shooter in catch-and-shoot situations after Wagner. Granted, I'd take all those guys ahead of Zaire (except for Jalen Johnson), but I wouldn't be surprised if Ziaire passes some of them in productivity if the shot pops off.
- I think the concerns about his strength, frame, and durability are all real. He definitely needs to build strength, but he also may have a cap to how strong he can get. He definitely wasn't very effective in college at the rim or when dealing with physicality. And certainly that would affect his defensive upside (as we've seen with Brandon Ingram, who was a positive defender in college but hasn't really ever been so as a pro).

So yeah, I think he could go anywhere between, like, 10 and 30. I think if he shoots and bulks up, he could be one of the ten best pros in the draft. I think there's also a real chance you end up with a 3-and-D guy who's an average shooter and an average defender, which means he's a bench guy at best. Ultimately, I'm tossing out last year and he's got a good feel and IQ, so I'd be inclined to lean above his media outcome instead of below. But yeah, he's a mystery box. Probably best suited to go to a team picking mid to late teens that has zero interest in winning immediately but big interest in potential future star power (the Thunder would be a great spot for him).

(I realize that's a lot of words for "I don't know." lol. But yeah, he's one of the more intriguing options in this draft due to all the mystery around what to do with last season's game tape.)

He's old (24), not a great passer, and not an elite athlete... but he's got all the tools to be an immediate 3-and-D guy. One of the best 3-point shooters in the class. One of the better mid-range shooters as well. Can shoot off the catch, can pull up off the bounce. Decent dribble-drive guy too, so he's not one-dimensional there. He's also a really good defender, moves well away from the ball, good quickness on the perimeter. Hard worker, high character guy.

Any team looking to make the playoffs next year should take him. And I wouldn't be surprised if he snuck into the lottery for a team who really needs minutes next season from their pick. In a draft where a *lot* of guys who'll go first round are high-upside-but-not-ready guys? Duarte stands out as being ready.

A Top 3 defensive big man in this draft. Huge body, phenomenal athlete, really fast for his size. Elite weak side shot blocker. Ideal drop coverage big, but if a team wants to use him in switches, you could do a lot worse considering his speed, length, and quick twitch. Very high motor.

I'm not especially high on his offensive upside-- I don't think he's a stretch big, and he's not really a shot creator now, although I suppose it's not impossible he gets there. But he's got such an obvious role as an NBA big-- setting screens, catching lobs, crashing offensive boards, dunking putbacks-- that I'm not convinced he needs to be a shooter. Guys like Clint Capela, Mitchell Robinson, etc., have obvious value. So does Jackson.

Now, does that value translate to lottery? I'm not sure. Big men just aren't what teams build around these days. I reckon many teams would rather take the upside wing or guard than the next Clint Capela, for better or worse. But the further he slips, the more I'd like him. He's got the tools to stick around and become an NBA starter.

Like, the potential is there. For his height, he's a very good passer. Maybe even an elite passer for his size. Playmaking potential is obvious. Not an elite athlete, but he runs the floor well-- definitely a positive impact player in transition, and he definitely looks for the big moments.

That said, I don't think it's a coincidence that Duke *immediately* got better the second Jalen Johnson left the team.

- Can't shoot. Did a good job taking only the widest open 3s on very limited attempts, but his midrange was bad, and his FT shooting was bad (63%).
- *Very* high and loose handle at present. Which, of course, means he was very turnover prone, especially in the half court.
- His desire for the splashy play often resulted in him forcing passes or action, once again leading to turnovers, especially in the half court.
- As you may have gathered from the above, he's currently a negative value half court player.
- His overall defensive awareness is atrocious. He's a good weak side shot blocker and a decent presence in the passing lanes due to his size, but he completely lacks the lateral speed to defend players off the dribble or in pick and roll. Johnson's positional speed advantage is basically only in straight line running. Side to side, he looks like he's moving through mud. He also rarely ever rotated correctly, and he was content to jump out of position to try to force turnovers, often leaving his man wide open to drive or shoot.

Some of these things are age-related, sure... but right now, he's essentially a slower, less athletic Ben Simmons who doesn't play defense. So, like, who is that as a player? How does he serve winning?

I didn't bring up the character stuff, that he's now left multiple teams midseason, and some of the clear chemistry problem stuff he's had over the last two years and change, because if you're a crazy asshole but you can ball? You'll play. Like, Kevin Porter is gonna stick in the NBA one way or another, because dude has a gift for scoring at the highest level. But right now? I don't know what Jalen Johnson does.

Now, I think he'll be taken in the first round, because someone will see him and say, "If we tighten his handle, and if we get him to commit to defense, and if we can teach him to shoot a basketball, there's mismatch star potential there," because that's true. You do all of those things, and he could be... I don't know, a taller Coke Zero version of Paul Pierce? But like, if Paul Pierce shot 30% from 3, 65% from FT, was a net negative defender, and had a 20+% turnover rate? Does that player even get a second contract in Boston?

I fully acknowledge there's a world in which Jalen Johnson becomes the star that everyone thought he'd be last season. But he's just a long way from getting there, at least according to what he showed last season. I'd wait until the twenties at earliest to draft him and I'd stash him in the G-League or something-- or, if I'm OKC or some team in a rebuild, I let him struggle for a couple of seasons on an NBA court and get him used to the speed of the game. But who knows-- he could tumble on draft night, or a team could fall in love with his potential and take him as high as mid-lottery. I hope he works out, because I want any Duke player to succeed... but I think the concerns about how he fits in the league with his current lack of half court offense and all-around defense skills are very real.

I don't think Sharpe will ever be a true starter type, because he just absolutely can't shoot at all, and he was really turnover prone with the ball in his hands even on simple 1-to-2 dribble post moves. He's also only average size and athleticism for an NBA big-- if you're 6'11 with a 7' wingspan, you better be able to soar off the bounce to protect the rim, and Sharpe, while not ground-bound, just isn't that guy.

That said, he's a smart player, good footwork on both ends, and he works really hard. Probably not a switchable defending big, but if he was in that system, I think he'd do better than most. He gets a lot of mileage out of just outworking dudes, crashing the boards harder than dudes, not shying away from physical play. There's a place for a guy like that on the bench in theory. Bring him in for 12-15 minutes a game, have him run around, annoy dudes, grab boards, play D, sprint. I'm sure Phoenix would've preferred a guy like Sharpe to a guy like Kaminsky backing up Ayton in the Finals.

I'm a little worried because his jumper, while it fell his junior year, was kind of all over the place before that, and it's definitely not that aesthetically pleasing in terms of mechanics. I'd also like him a bit more if he was a primary creator at the NBA level, but he's more of a secondary option combo guard type.

That said, if you believe in his jumper, he's a first rounder, and maybe toward the middle of the first. Good defender. Good positional size. Good athleticism. Good passer. Good at wanting the ball in the big moments. Wouldn't say he's *great* for an NBA player at any of those things, but he's definitely a very high character kid-- he could've come out the year before, came back, busted his ass, shot the ball a lot better, led his team to a 1 seed. You can't ask for much more than that.

If you think the jumper is iffy, you probably look at him in the very late first, probably early second. If you believe in it, there's value mid-first. For my money, any team after 25 that takes him is probably getting a bargain, especially because those are playoff teams that could instantly use him as a plug-and-play bench guy. Might have starter upside down the road too if the jumper stays at 38+%. I understand the questions, because that jumper definitely isn't my favorite for a combo guard in the class, but I also wouldn't bet against the dude to make it work. He's a winner.

the next man. Love him. I think at this point even with the good things, he is still figuring things out. Year 3, he makes a jump.

The downsides are pretty clear-- even though he's got good size, he's still pretty skinny. Put on something like 15-20 lbs this offseason when he came back, but he's still got another 20 to go. He got bullied on defense in the SEC, so at the NBA level, forget about it. Also jumps for steals too much, gets out of position... which, again, may be indicative of his knowledge that he's currently unable to defend. He's decently quick, but not really NBA quick. He's definitely got to become at least a mediocre defender to reach his potential in the NBA.

He's also mostly a perimeter player-- he's great out there, but in traffic, he tends to make mistakes. Again, this might be exacerbated by a relative lack of strength, because he's overall a pretty damn good ball handler for this draft. Or maybe he's just still young and trying to do too much.

That said, I would definitely express interest earlier than most because he's one of the best shooters in the draft, both as a catch-and-shoot guy and off the bounce. Can pull up from deep 3, mid-range, you name it, he can drain it. And like I said, he's on the whole a quite good ball handler. More of a secondary playmaker than a primary guy, but a decent enough passer.

But in a league that's more and more driven by the ability to make jumpers, you've got a guy with good positional size who can make jumpers from mid-range and 3, from pull-up and from the catch? He might not have the highest ceiling, but if he gains some strength and becomes a non-liability on defense, he could definitely start. And I think he could potentially give off the bench minutes to a contender sooner rather than later.

he has some of the same issues, but with more dog and less athleticism

I saw a Nickeil Alexander-Walker comparison that I liked. More of a secondary creator than a primary one, but still a good passer and could play some minutes at the point if needed. Really good defender on the perimeter-- probably better than Walker in this regard. Terrific dribble-drive guy, strong finisher.

I worry about the shot-- the numbers look good on limited attempts, but I don't love how it looks. He also seemed pretty hesitant to launch, like a guy who's only shooting it when he has to. He's also an abysmal pull-up shooter and mid-range guy right now. I forget which writer pointed this out first, but he basically defaults to the jump stop when shooting on the move, and I worry about that in the NBA, because if it gave college defenders chances to recover, NBA defenders will swat that shit away.

I think if he can maintain something like 38%+ from 3/80%+ from FT shooting numbers, he's a starter-- and even if it settles in closer to average or a little below from the perimeter, he's probably still a role player due to his driving and defense. Keon has the much higher ceiling, but I'd also argue he has the lower floor. I'd like Springer somewhere in the 20s.

I really, really, REALLY want to be in on Sharife as at least a backup PG in the NBA. Anyone who watched him this year knows that dude did *everything* for Auburn this year. He's an elite live dribble passer and an elite ball-handler in this class-- and he'd be on the high end of both skills in the NBA already. Incredible body control, strong IQ, terrific passing reads, good NBA speed. You'd like to think that guys with this combo of skills can stick...

... but he can't shoot. Shot 23% from 3 on roughly 5 attempts per game. Maybe you look at his FT percentage (83%) and say "hey, he's a better shooter than that, and he took a lot of contested shots doing everything for his team, like you said! Maybe this was anomalous!" Fair enough... but he's so small (6'1, 180) that you have to wonder how much of that will change in an NBA where the majority of PG defenders will be bigger than him.

Also... he can't defend. And this one really isn't likely to change, again due to size. He's just straight up a bad defender. Maybe he could figure out how to use his speed to be disruptive... but he's got a small frame and small height. He'd get routinely bullied in PnR.

The question here is something along the lines of "if Trae Young shot 25% from 3, would he be playable in today's NBA?" Maybe yes to Trae, since he also has the best floater in the NBA right now, but outside of that? Probably not, right? Or at least not as more than a backup PG off the bench kind of deal.

So if a team thinks they can teach Sharife to shoot, say, 35+% from 3? They could end up with a really exciting steal on their hands. He'll never defend in the NBA, but he could be a really exciting initiator at the point of attack. But if you don't think the 3-pointer will ever get there? Yeah... I'd have to slide him down into the low 20s at best and hope he can shoot passably enough to become a backup. And there are very, very few guys that small who can't shoot who make it as NBA players.

He's an appalling defender, and he never passes the ball. But man, he just flat out gets BUCKETS. Incredible pull up game, incredible at getting to the line, and though his percentages from beyond the arc weren't great, a lot of those were tough shots on a high volume-- and his free throw percentage being near 90% definitely suggests he should at least be an average to plus 3PT shooter.

So... I don't think you can draft him to start. Unless you think he's a star (I don't), you draft him because you think he can be an incredible bench burner, an instant offense type. I think his best case is... like, smaller TJ Warren? Better Malik Monk? But if you're looking for a starter, unless you're sculpting your offense around this guy, I wouldn't draft him. Because I'm not convinced that he long term contributes to winning basketball if he's one of your main pieces.

>He's an appalling defender, and he never passes the ball. But
>man, he just flat out gets BUCKETS. Incredible pull up game,
>incredible at getting to the line, and though his percentages
>from beyond the arc weren't great, a lot of those were tough
>shots on a high volume-- and his free throw percentage being
>near 90% definitely suggests he should at least be an average
>to plus 3PT shooter.
>
>So... I don't think you can draft him to start. Unless you
>think he's a star (I don't), you draft him because you think
>he can be an incredible bench burner, an instant offense type.
>I think his best case is... like, smaller TJ Warren? Better
>Malik Monk? But if you're looking for a starter, unless you're
>sculpting your offense around this guy, I wouldn't draft him.
>Because I'm not convinced that he long term contributes to
>winning basketball if he's one of your main pieces.

I worry a little bit about the heart condition he's got that's been bandied about (and almost didn't get him medically cleared to play in the NBA). But let's assume that he's fine to play and that the heart condition isn't a determining factor.

If that's the case, and I'm a playoff ready team drafting immediately after the lottery, I've got to consider Butler in a big way. He has NBA handles. He's an elite shooter, one of the best in the class. The best pull-up 3 shooter in the class, in all likelihood. Very good passer for a 2 guard. Good defender, despite not being a super-plus athlete.

I do worry that his size is a little small and his speed/explosiveness are a little sub-par to make him become a true strong starter on a good team. These things could impact his efficacy on offense and his ability to stay with guys on defense. That said, I've worried these same sorts of things about, say, Jalen Brunson among others and given them a too-low grade as a result. Same with Trae Young, really. At this point, if you have skills that really help you shine in an NBA offense, and you've got a translatable pull-up jump shot, then concerns about size and/or athleticism, especially as they pertain to defense, just shouldn't be as high as they may have been a decade ago.

Tale of the tape is pretty simple-- one of the better catch-and-shoot shooters in the draft, one of the better on-ball wing defenders in the draft. Prototypical wing size, good athleticism and length on the perimeter. Limited upside, as he's not a pull up guy, doesn't have great handles, not a passer, etc... things that maybe could come around, but even if they don't, the value for an NBA team in 2021 is pretty obvious.

He could be Cam Johnson right away, and Cam just played 20+ minutes in the playoffs in Year 2. Probably better than Cam as a prospect because of the defense too. Might be closer to Danny Green than Cam Johnson, if all breaks well.

I hate betting against JRE, because he's a high-character kid, a high-IQ player, and has won at every level. There's nothing that he can't do at least decently well. Good defender. Good passer. Good rebounder. Really good in PnR. Knows exactly where to be on both ends, how to space, how to rotate, everything.

Problem is he's almost certainly bottom half of the NBA in athleticism and speed for his position. Like, he can use his IQ to be a valuable team defender... but he can't stop anyone, and he probably can't really protect the rim. And he can be a valuable, unselfish role player on offense... but if he can't shoot the ball and space the floor well, what is he? What does he do? And right now, there are real questions about if he can shoot the ball from 3 at the NBA level-- he hit corner 3s at a reasonably high rate, but everywhere else on the floor, his numbers were rough, and he averaged out at about 30% from 3 for his career at Villanova.

So if he's a 4 man who can't defend 1v1 and can't help your offense except for ball movement, then... he's not an NBA player, he's a very good Euroleague player. If you think, however, that he can shoot, say 37% from 3 eventually on catch-and-shoot opportunities? Then I like him as a role player-- not a sixth man, but a valuable minutes guy in the second unit.

He’s not ready

He's got the pieces you want for the most part. He's got great size for a wing. He's not selfish, and he's pretty high IQ-- sometimes you see elite HS players with disastrous freshman campaigns and think they're some mega-athlete with low IQ, but Boston is kinda the opposite. He's a fine, not great, athlete, and he plays pretty well. The shots just... weren't falling. At all.

Good handles too, gets to his spots well for jumpshots. But again, the shots just... didn't fall. At all.

His defense got better as the season progressed, imo. The 6'11 wingspan and IQ could lead him to be a net positive defender eventually, but he's got to build more muscle, and he needs to get better at off-ball defense (though this is true of most freshman, especially of ones that are frustrated by their offensive struggles).

He shot nearly 80% from the FT line, so you've got to think he's a better shooter than what he showed... but holy shit, he was one of the worst high-volume shooters in college basketball in the last several years last year. Sub-28 percent on both catch-and-shoots and pull-ups. 30% from midrange. 40% at the rim-- which is an absolute dumpster fire for a kid who clearly likes to dribble drive and get to the rim. A few factors can explain this-- lack of overall strength being one of them-- but you definitely have to be concerned that the lack of explosiveness and first step compared to other players in high-major college might have played a role too. Which would be really bad for his NBA potential.

He's only draftable by two types of teams: 1. A tanking team looking to build a roster of upside assets that are essentially lottery tickets, hopeful some of them cash. 2. A really good playoff team with no roster space, drafting higher upside assets to stash in the G League.

If you think Boston can shoot at even an NBA average level, he could be a bench guy-- and if you think he could be a good shooter (and people thought this when he was in HS!), then there's maybe even some sixth man upside here. But if he can't shoot, he's not an NBA player. I'd take a second round flier on him if I'm one of the above two types of teams, though. He's a good character kid, hard worker, and definitely will have a chip on his shoulder. After the Clarke tragedy, I'm rooting for him.

C, Western Kentucky

I'm thinking I want the Lakers to target this guy and go after experienced shooters via free agency.

Yes, he's got good size, so maybe a team can see some potential in him and take him in the back half of the second round. But:

- Not a very good shooter. Not awful, but not a real threat away from the rim.
- Not many post moves at all, mostly plays bully ball at present.
- Can't handle the ball at all.
- Can't pass at all.
- Can't defend away from the rim.
- Terrible pick-and-roll defender.
- Decent shot blocker, but his block goes notably down against better competition.

Mostly, he's a big man with good athleticism (albeit limited lateral quickness), a great rebounder, and a guy with potential as a shot blocker. I'm basically describing a worse version of Andre Drummond with shorter arms-- and Drummond is barely playable in the NBA today with the way the game is currently played.

I won't be surprised if a team reaches for him in hopes of (a) thinking his HS pedigree still carries enough weight, and (b) thinking they can develop him into a 10-12 MPG rim protector off the bench. But he'll provide nothing on offense other than the odd putback and nothing on defense beyond 3 feet from the rim. I just don't see players like that having value in today's NBA.

There will be a dozen free agents who can help fill that role for the Lakers better than Bassey. Bassey should only be drafted by teams who'll send him to the G-League for 2-3 years in hopes that can he can become a passable jump shooter or an elite rim protector.

Wouldn't be surprised if he ends up as the best on-ball defender of any guard in this draft. 6'2 height isn't ideal, but he's got a huge 6'9 wingspan, a strong 200+ lb frame, and absurd speed, especially laterally. Combine that with an elite motor, and dude could certainly be one of those pesky defenders we see on opposing PGs with regularity. Not purely switchable, but he could defend 1 and 2 with ease, maybe some 3s with length, and then dig in with his great hands and length against bigs if they try to back him down to hopefully turn them over.

He's also, unlike the aforementioned Beverly, a really nice pull-up jump shooter. Good catch-and-shoot guy too-- made something like 50% of his 3s on catch-and-shoot last year on a relatively small sample. He's traditionally played more like a combo guard than a pure PG... but he made a huge leap toward showcasing PG skills last season. He's a good not great passer, but he plays smart, dictates tempo, and doesn't turn it over needlessly.

I think we see him get drafted back half of the first, and if he goes to a contender, he's the sort of guy that could get serious bench minutes right away and sneak into an All-Rookie Team. He's just so tenacious and has flashed all manner of skills that are translatable. I think there's a real chance he's under-drafted on draft night-- he's easily Top 20 on my big board.

Herb Jones: Elite wing size and quickness. Great defender, switchable through 4 positions-- maybe even 5 if he can bulk up. Strong passer from the wing position. High character kid. I'm concerned about the jumpshot, because if he can't shoot, it's tough for guys like him to earn real minutes... but the shot looked somewhat better this year, and I'd be willing to bet on a hard worker like Jones to figure it out, especially when every other part of his game is translatable. End of first round guy for me.

Bones Hyland: Outside of Cooper, the best handles in the draft. A terrific pull-up jump shooter, a terrific finisher at the rim. If you want a Jordan Clarkson type guy to come off the bench and just burn teams, Hyland's the guy. Not a great defender right now, still has to build strength, and isn't a great passer at the moment (like I said, Jordan Clarkson type), but again, easy end of first round guy for me.

Joe Weiskamp: You need a floor-spacing big wing? Here you go. Very Duncan Robinson-esque. Terrific wing size (6'7, 6'11 wingspan). Shooting numbers are nuts: 46% from 3 this season, 41% from 3 for his career, both on very high volume. 50% from 3 on catch-and-shoot, again, on very high volume. Almost 57% from 3 on NBA range attempts. 73% effective field goal percentage last season, third best in the country, and the only high-major player in the top 10. Dude is a bonkers shooter and moves beautifully off the ball. Like Robinson, he can't defend or put it on the floor-- he's a pure floor spacer. But there's real value having him on the roster in today's NBA. End of first, start of second for me. Any lower than 35, he's a steal.

Josh Primo: Look, he's really raw, because he's probably the youngest player that'll get drafted (literally just turned 18 and a half), but if he'd gone back to Alabama, I think he would've been a Top 15ish projected pick in 2022. Great shooting guard size, really good shooter, good at moving his feet, should be a good on-ball defender once he gains muscle. Not a guy I expect to see play much next season, because he's still so raw... but considering Houston has two picks at 23 and 24, and then after that you have a bunch of contenders, many of whom are looking for guys to stash and develop instead of play right away? I wouldn't be surprised if he still goes first round. And while I'm skeptical on a number of raw talents in this draft, Primo having good size, good shooting, and good defensive potential makes him feel like he has a higher floor out of the high-ceiling guys later in the draft.

Quentin Grimes: Easy pitch here-- he's a really good catch-and-shoot 3-point shooting guard, and he's a net positive defender. He also deserves all sorts of respect for being an elite OAD type prospect who absolutely sucked as a freshman... but instead of just bailing on college and heading overseas, or continuing to languish at the NCAA level, worked his ass off to become an elite player at the college level. Love his value in the second round as a role player off the bench with some starter upside if the 3s consistently fall.

Austin Reaves: Here's a tough, mean mugging, white boy guard with swagger for people to love/hate. Potentially the next Alex Caruso or Grayson Allen. Terrific shooter-- his numbers at Oklahoma may not indicate that, but that's because he was asked to do so much in that offense, contested, off the bounce, through double teams, etc. At Wichita State, he proved he's an elite shooter off the catch, and he's a skilled enough ball handler to give enough some pull-up opportunities at the NBA level as well when needed. Also a really good passer for his size and could handle the point in spots off the bench if needed. Not the best defender but also won't quit and won't blow rotations. Love him as a bench guy start of the second, and on a bad team, wouldn't surprise me if he ended up starting and doing real numbers pretty quickly.

Neemias Queta: I'm usually lower on big men than most, just because I don't think they have the same value as wings or primary ball handlers, but I've liked Queta since his freshman year. Great NBA size-- 7 feet, 7'4, wingspan, 250 lbs-- and pretty good athleticism for his size. He's not Evan Mobley, but he's not Jakob Poeltl either. Elite rim protecting big, elite defensive rebounder, elite shot blocker-- could potentially be the best at all three of these things in the draft class. Strong post-up offensive player. Also a good passer for a big. Six or seven years ago, he's pretty inarguably a lottery pick. The problem, of course, is his lateral movement-- no real switchability on the outside, so it'll be hard to play him in end-of-game situations. He's also not really a pick-and-pop guy right now, though I'd argue he's got a little upside to be at least competent in that regard-- he's a 70% FT shooter, so maybe he could make just enough 3s to keep teams honest with some work. I don't think you can take him in the first round, but if you're a team with a drop coverage scheme, I'd take him pretty early in the second to be my backup center with a little bit of starter upside in the right scenario.

Jericho Sims: this might be my hottest take, as I saw him 50s to undrafted in most mocks before the combine... but I'd consider taking him maybe all the way at the end of the first. Why? Because his role in the NBA is so obvious. He's a rim runner and rim protector. Only 6'9, but 7'3 wingspan, great vertical leap, and great timing on blocks. Good movement on the perimeter for a guy his size too-- he's probably more equipped to switching on defense than all but two or three bigs in the draft. On offense, he knows his role-- he sets picks, he flashes to the rim, he leaps, he catches lobs, he grabs boards, he puts back dunks on fools. He's not a shooter and probably won't ever be. He's not even a good FT shooter (that's my biggest concern). But his role is tailor made. There are higher upside bigs in the draft who will go above him... but if I'm a contender drafting in the 20s that needs big man bench support right today (Brooklyn, for instance)? I'd definitely consider reaching for him.

But thus far you are spot on about Reeves. What a nice little surprise he’s been.

...but he was talking greasy about Jamal Murray and not liking the fact that Murray would (rightfully) gain his starting spot back after he comes back from injury (despite his above average performances while filling in)



>Herb Jones: Elite wing size and quickness. Great defender,
>switchable through 4 positions-- maybe even 5 if he can bulk
>up. Strong passer from the wing position. High character kid.
>I'm concerned about the jumpshot, because if he can't shoot,
>it's tough for guys like him to earn real minutes... but the
>shot looked somewhat better this year, and I'd be willing to
>bet on a hard worker like Jones to figure it out, especially
>when every other part of his game is translatable. End of
>first round guy for me.
>
>Bones Hyland: Outside of Cooper, the best handles in the
>draft. A terrific pull-up jump shooter, a terrific finisher at
>the rim. If you want a Jordan Clarkson type guy to come off
>the bench and just burn teams, Hyland's the guy. Not a great
>defender right now, still has to build strength, and isn't a
>great passer at the moment (like I said, Jordan Clarkson
>type), but again, easy end of first round guy for me.
>
>Joe Weiskamp: You need a floor-spacing big wing? Here you go.
>Very Duncan Robinson-esque. Terrific wing size (6'7, 6'11
>wingspan). Shooting numbers are nuts: 46% from 3 this season,
>41% from 3 for his career, both on very high volume. 50% from
>3 on catch-and-shoot, again, on very high volume. Almost 57%
>from 3 on NBA range attempts. 73% effective field goal
>percentage last season, third best in the country, and the
>only high-major player in the top 10. Dude is a bonkers
>shooter and moves beautifully off the ball. Like Robinson, he
>can't defend or put it on the floor-- he's a pure floor
>spacer. But there's real value having him on the roster in
>today's NBA. End of first, start of second for me. Any lower
>than 35, he's a steal.
>
>Josh Primo: Look, he's really raw, because he's probably the
>youngest player that'll get drafted (literally just turned 18
>and a half), but if he'd gone back to Alabama, I think he
>would've been a Top 15ish projected pick in 2022. Great
>shooting guard size, really good shooter, good at moving his
>feet, should be a good on-ball defender once he gains muscle.
>Not a guy I expect to see play much next season, because he's
>still so raw... but considering Houston has two picks at 23
>and 24, and then after that you have a bunch of contenders,
>many of whom are looking for guys to stash and develop instead
>of play right away? I wouldn't be surprised if he still goes
>first round. And while I'm skeptical on a number of raw
>talents in this draft, Primo having good size, good shooting,
>and good defensive potential makes him feel like he has a
>higher floor out of the high-ceiling guys later in the draft.
>
>
>Quentin Grimes: Easy pitch here-- he's a really good
>catch-and-shoot 3-point shooting guard, and he's a net
>positive defender. He also deserves all sorts of respect for
>being an elite OAD type prospect who absolutely sucked as a
>freshman... but instead of just bailing on college and heading
>overseas, or continuing to languish at the NCAA level, worked
>his ass off to become an elite player at the college level.
>Love his value in the second round as a role player off the
>bench with some starter upside if the 3s consistently fall.
>
>Austin Reaves: Here's a tough, mean mugging, white boy guard
>with swagger for people to love/hate. Potentially the next
>Alex Caruso or Grayson Allen. Terrific shooter-- his numbers
>at Oklahoma may not indicate that, but that's because he was
>asked to do so much in that offense, contested, off the
>bounce, through double teams, etc. At Wichita State, he proved
>he's an elite shooter off the catch, and he's a skilled enough
>ball handler to give enough some pull-up opportunities at the
>NBA level as well when needed. Also a really good passer for
>his size and could handle the point in spots off the bench if
>needed. Not the best defender but also won't quit and won't
>blow rotations. Love him as a bench guy start of the second,
>and on a bad team, wouldn't surprise me if he ended up
>starting and doing real numbers pretty quickly.
>
>Neemias Queta: I'm usually lower on big men than most, just
>because I don't think they have the same value as wings or
>primary ball handlers, but I've liked Queta since his freshman
>year. Great NBA size-- 7 feet, 7'4, wingspan, 250 lbs-- and
>pretty good athleticism for his size. He's not Evan Mobley,
>but he's not Jakob Poeltl either. Elite rim protecting big,
>elite defensive rebounder, elite shot blocker-- could
>potentially be the best at all three of these things in the
>draft class. Strong post-up offensive player. Also a good
>passer for a big. Six or seven years ago, he's pretty
>inarguably a lottery pick. The problem, of course, is his
>lateral movement-- no real switchability on the outside, so
>it'll be hard to play him in end-of-game situations. He's also
>not really a pick-and-pop guy right now, though I'd argue he's
>got a little upside to be at least competent in that regard--
>he's a 70% FT shooter, so maybe he could make just enough 3s
>to keep teams honest with some work. I don't think you can
>take him in the first round, but if you're a team with a drop
>coverage scheme, I'd take him pretty early in the second to be
>my backup center with a little bit of starter upside in the
>right scenario.
>
>Jericho Sims: this might be my hottest take, as I saw him 50s
>to undrafted in most mocks before the combine... but I'd
>consider taking him maybe all the way at the end of the first.
>Why? Because his role in the NBA is so obvious. He's a rim
>runner and rim protector. Only 6'9, but 7'3 wingspan, great
>vertical leap, and great timing on blocks. Good movement on
>the perimeter for a guy his size too-- he's probably more
>equipped to switching on defense than all but two or three
>bigs in the draft. On offense, he knows his role-- he sets
>picks, he flashes to the rim, he leaps, he catches lobs, he
>grabs boards, he puts back dunks on fools. He's not a shooter
>and probably won't ever be. He's not even a good FT shooter
>(that's my biggest concern). But his role is tailor made.
>There are higher upside bigs in the draft who will go above
>him... but if I'm a contender drafting in the 20s that needs
>big man bench support right today (Brooklyn, for instance)?
>I'd definitely consider reaching for him.
>

If you can get a guy who gives you roughly 10 PPG off the bench (which Bones has done for his career) at the end of the first, you take that basically all day... but the defense is still bad, the passing is still bad.

He also was a good finisher at the rim his first season or so... but it seems like he's increasing going to mid-range pull-ups and attempted floaters instead of going hard to the rack. Not sure whether that's still a strength issue or if it's just "fuck it, I don't like getting hit," lol-- but either way, taking lower percentage shots and getting to the line less frequently is not what you want from your bench scorer, ideally.

Still only 23, but the Murray thing was a red flag, as is the lack of improvement in trouble areas... if he wants to stick well beyond his rookie deal, he's gotta improve the defense or the passing. Can't be a ball stopper on one end and a matador on the other.