Your 2022 NBA Draft Prospect

[vic]

Trying to warm up to Keegan..

Love his late blooming height, his fluid movement , his mature mindset and golf player mental focus. Might as well get excited.

Watch on YouTube

[The Moose]

Trying to warm up to Keegan..

Love his late blooming height, his fluid movement , his mature mindset and golf player mental focus. Might as well get excited.

Watch on YouTube

The late bloomer/late grower thing at least can maybe explain why it took him so long to get to where he is now compared to other prospects

He reminds me somewhat of like a forward version of McCollum, who was a late bloomer/grower, an extremely productive college player, but considered a fairly boring as a draft prospect due to age and playing style

[vic]

Trying to warm up to Keegan..

Love his late blooming height, his fluid movement , his mature mindset and golf player mental focus. Might as well get excited.

Watch on YouTube

The late bloomer/late grower thing at least can maybe explain why it took him so long to get to where he is now compared to other prospects

He reminds me somewhat of like a forward version of McCollum, who was a late bloomer/grower, an extremely productive college player, but considered a fairly boring as a draft prospect due to age and playing style

I agree... the assist to to ratio is way better than Eason too... which that alone should be enough for me to put him over Eason. But Eason is so much more explosive. But Eason fouls too much too.

I'm getting more comfortable with Keegan

[edmunder_prc]

I will need to watch more of Ivey but Im not sold on him or Sharpe honestly.

I want to trade Grant + Diallo to someone for a lottery pick.

Pick someone like Eason and also get Dyson or Mark Williams. Just work with internal growth.

Bey, Hayes, Livers, even that Key guy all have some potential.

Add some dynamic players like Eason and Dyson or a giant like Mark Williams - in 2-3 years the team will be certainly be a playoff team and then hope for a trade to bring a piece in like Toronto Raptors.

[edmunder_prc]

Trying to warm up to Keegan..

Love his late blooming height, his fluid movement , his mature mindset and golf player mental focus. Might as well get excited.

Watch on YouTube

All I think is Obi Toppin. Some older guy who feasts on 18-19 kids then gets the NBA and is a 7th man on the Knicks.

Take any of the lottery picks and let them stay in the NCAA two more years, they will look like Jordan.

Let someone else take Obi 2.0.

[buzzkilloton]

Murray does not look good in these scouting vids imo. I've tried watching a bunch with putting negative bias aside and still not impressed. If you watch a full game of him you see it though. He really had absurd production.

I'm out on him though.

[FloridaMan78]

I think here’s a good example of Sharpe’s game.

Dude can jump out the gym. He has a good pull up jumper. Not proven but I think it translates eventually. Good cutter and alley oop finisher. Can hit an open jumper.

But he doesn’t drive to hoop once.

Needs a clear lane to dunk.

Once he learns how to get into the lane his game can really open up. He’s a good passer, but he’s gotta be able to get in the lane. Guys are gonna get up on him until he proves he can drive by them. All his jumpers will be difficult unless they’re wide open.

But even if he doesn’t, he’s still Diallo with a jumpshot. I wouldn’t be upset if we drafted him. I would have measured expectations of him though.

Watch on YouTube

[MotownMadness]

I actually really liked Murray everytime i got to watch him. Dude gets after it defensively, can score at the rim and has a smooth jumper.

The age thing is the only worrisome thing with him otherwise he's really solid all around.

[buzzkilloton]

https://theathletic.com/3317217/2022/05/18/nba-draft-2022-top-20-prospects/

One of my fav draft articles is the hollinger piece he puts out. I love that we get to see what a actual former nba exec has to say on the class. He usually has some takes against the main stream and this he does again. I'll post in spoilers some descriptions of the guys were mostly looking at below.

I'll post his intro that talks about the league is overdrafting centers still. This is exactly why i hate paying a bag to a guy like Ayton.

Tier 1-"the biggest fish in a medium size pond"

1.Smiith
2.Paolo

Tier 2-"high ceilings but more speculative"
3.Ivey
4.Chet

Tier 3-reliably solid wings
5.Mathurin
6.Sharpe
7.Murray

Tier 4 "lets get crazy"

8.Sochan
9.Daniels
10.Minot
11.Wesley

tier 5
12.Duren
13.Griffin
14.Ty Washing
15.Brown
16.Eason I stopped at Eason because hes a fan favorite.

intro

Spoiler:

Are you watching the playoffs?

Are you watching them and thinking about what they might mean for this year’s draft?

We’re in a little bit of a weird place, right? The consensus top three players are fours and fives, but all the value is in big wings. Unlike a year ago, there isn’t an easy pathway to sorting out the top of the draft based on positional value. That ballhandling, playmaking 6-7 wing every team craves isn’t out there at the top of this draft. Maybe a Cade Cunningham or Scottie Barnes is hiding in the weeds, but if so, it’s much less obvious this time around.

Similarly, we have some good bigs in this draft, but we don’t have an Evan Mobley-type, whose switchability is so obvious that it would allay concerns about the decreasing value of centers in the postseason. Conversely, in a world where either having a P.J. Tucker-type body or just being a 6-6 guy who doesn’t suck has exponentially more value in the games that matter most, a lot of energy must necessarily tilt toward finding those types of players in the draft.

The top three players in this draft are bigs, with one being a true rim-protecting five. At least two other traditional centers are on every lottery board, and if you made a consensus mock draft right now, you’d see a generous sprinkling of players shorter than 6-5 as well. With centers in particular, we run into issues of diminishing returns. You can play one center, but never more; meanwhile, you can play as many 6-7 guys as you want in today’s NBA, provided at least one of them can dribble.

Despite that, teams continue to overvalue taking big centers at the top of the draft. We’ve had 18 centers drafted in the top six picks since 2002; only three of them have played in an All-Star Game, and in the case of Chris Kaman, we’re defining this term extremely broadly. Should Mobley and Deandre Ayton eventually make it, we’ll be at five. Woohoo.

Mobley proves the exception to the rule — a 7-foot center who plays as a perimeter player, particularly on defense. Meanwhile the best offensive center in the league (Nikola Jokić) was picked 46th, the best defensive center (Rudy Gobert) was picked 27th, and this year’s other 7-foot All-Stars (Jarrett Allen and Joel Embiid) were picked 22nd and third respectively.

On the flip side, we’ve had a perimeter All-Star selected in the top five of every draft since 2010, if we assume one of Cunningham or Barnes breaks through soon. And we’re on a stretch of 20 straight drafts in the top six. A couple of them stretch the definition of “All-Star” a bit (Andrew Wiggins was voted in, and Devin Harris and D’Angelo Russell each made it once), but most were legit.

Overall, we’re talking about 27 All-Star perimeter players from 19 drafts, and 23 of them were no-doubt-about-it, All-Star-caliber players. Despite the zest for size at the top of the draft, most of these stars weren’t that big; only Kevin Durant, LeBron James, Ben Simmons and Brandon Ingram were taller than 6-7.

So … do you want to pick from the bin that provided 27 All-Stars or the bin that gave us three?

I bring this up for two fairly obvious reasons. First, I think teams are still guilty of overdrafting centers — James Wiseman, Mo Bamba, Dragan Bender and Jahlil Okafor would be recent examples. Second, the consensus top three players in this particular class are all bigs, with perhaps the most highly touted one a 7-1 center.

So here’s the question … is Chet Holmgren (or Jabari Smith or Paolo Banchero) such an advantage at their positions that you’d prefer taking them to the chance of getting an All-Star perimeter player?

The flip side of this, of course, is what All-Star perimeter player? Have you been scouting some other NCAA, Hollinger? Teams would feel better about following my big-shunning strategy if there were wart-free wing options. This is, perhaps, not that kind of draft. Particularly in that sweet spot around 6-6 or 6-7, the talent pool is not safe for diving.

Wait, it gets worse. Two other issues underlie this year’s draft. First, this is one of the worst international draft classes in memory. Only two players have a realistic chance of going in the top 20, and neither played well even in relatively weak overseas leagues. Second, there is an absolutely staggering number of meh shooting guards for teams to sort through. We may set some kind of record for 6-4 guys who end up in France; several of them have been getting lottery buzz, for some reason, but I don’t have more than a couple in my top 20.

Nonetheless, teams must press on with the task of selecting the best talent and determining the best positional fits. And there is actually talent in this draft; it was harder to winnow my list down to 20 or so than I expected. It’s just hiding in some different places than you might have originally expected.

As is my recent pattern, I’m revealing my top 23 (with three sleepers included!) just after Tuesday night’s lottery and saving the rest of my top 75 for June, when we know for sure who is staying in the draft.

Why 20? Historically, there are about 20 players who end up mattering from each draft. Limiting myself this way forces me to think harder about who that 20 might be. I don’t use that as a hard and fast rule if I really love or hate the draft, but this year I have exactly 20, plus my three favorites from the shooting guard blahscape tacked on the end.

Here’s how my board looks:

Spoiler:

3. Jaden Ivey | 6-4 sophomore | SG | Purdue

Ivey is the one player in this draft who is most reminiscent of Ja Morant, with a blast-off first step that sends him rocketing toward the rim. It should be even more effective in the open space of the NBA versus a Purdue approach that was heavily geared toward entering the ball to its two behemoth post players.

Alas, the Morant comparisons break down once we get into the decision-making realm. Ivey barely averaged more assists than turnovers in Big Ten play; his good clips are ridiculous, but there is a lot of head-scratching chaff to work through before you get to that wheat. His shooting is also a question mark, with a below-the-shoulder set shot similar to Morant’s that yielded 32.2 percent from 3 and 73.98 percent from the line in his two years with the Boilermakers. Put simply, Ivey is going to be an offensive skill-development challenge for whatever team picks him, but the upside reward is an All-Star-caliber shot creator from the guard spot.

Defensively it’s a similar story. The physical toolset is there, but the application of those tools is a bit inconsistent. Ivey can get caught upright and blown by at times but doesn’t concede space and can still stay with dribblers. Opponents rarely went at him in isolation, perhaps because of the giant dude waiting in the paint behind him, but also because it didn’t look profitable the few times opponents tried. Ivey can slide his feet and explodes off the floor to challenge shots, sometimes surprising shooters who thought they had themselves a nice pull-up.

He needs the defensive output to be more consistent, especially if he’s juggling a prominent offensive role at the same time. The tape from his freshman year is actually even better, perhaps because less was being asked of him at the other end.

Overall, this is an eye-test call. Ivey’s college track record is wartier than you’d prefer for a pick this high, especially from a sophomore, but nobody else in this draft is in Ivey’s league as an off-the-dribble creative force.

Spoiler:

5. Bennedict Mathurin | 6-6 sophomore | SF | Arizona

One can argue it’s a reach to take Mathurin at No. 5, since it’s unlikely he’ll ever be the best player on his team. But because of his positional value and skill set, even his mid-tier scenarios make him a $20 million player in today’s NBA. Few players have more obvious 3-and-D utility than Mathurin, an athletic 6-6 Canadian of Haitian extraction who came through the NBA’s development academy in Mexico City. He’s still evolving into his game, but in two years at Arizona he shot 38.7 percent from 3 and 78.9 percent from the line.

Mathurin still needs to tighten his handle and improve his feel, factors that could limit him from moving beyond a 3-and-D role at the next level, but his size and plus athleticism give him outs even if he never turns into a ballhandling wizard. Additionally, he doubled his assist rate as a sophomore at Arizona, showing visible progress as an on-ball creator.

Defensively, Mathurin might be more “solid” than true stopper. He’ll get into the ball but is not quite as fluid laterally as you might hope. He also can sit up in his stance at times, permitting blow-bys. More often, he’s able to stay solid and use his size and length to contest late, but he’s rarely an active disruptor on that end.

Spoiler:

6. Shaedon Sharpe | 6-6 freshman | SG/SF | Kentucky

Teams have a lot of questions about Sharpe, questions that aren’t going to get answered by seeing him work out against a chair in Chicago at the combine. Why didn’t he play at all for Kentucky this year? How much did that set him back?

While teams comb through background parts and go back through his EYBL tape, the inevitably of the upside scenarios is what’s likely to see him chosen high. He could fail spectacularly, but the bar for this player archetype is pretty low as far as eventual success goes. Sharpe is 6-6 with a 6-11 wingspan and can really shoot; watching him work out on the floor before Kentucky’s NCAA Tournament game, I found it pretty clear he’ll be a viable NBA floor spacer from Day 1.

He’s also athletic enough that he was ranked as the top prospect in the Class of 2023 before reclassifying. How many guys like that, who also had elite shooting ability, have failed? Yes, there are questions about his feel and other, secondary lines of inquiry given that nobody has seen him play top-drawer competition. If he were a center or point guard, I’d have him several places lower. But a 6-6 wing who can shoot? Even if he “fails” in terms of achieving stardom, that still becomes a decent value proposition.

Spoiler:

7. Keegan Murray | 6-8 sophomore | SF/PF | Iowa

Murray is probably the most head-scratching player in this draft. On the one hand, he’s a 6-8 forward who put up video-game stats in the Big Ten. Don’t overthink this, right? But on the other hand, he was a much older player (turning 22 in August, he’s the second-oldest player on my list today), and his tape isn’t quite as alluring as his stats. Murray is neither a high-wire athlete nor a knockdown shooter. He’s fine and all — 37.3 percent from 3 and 74.9 percent from the line in two years at Iowa — but it’s his all-around wiles as a scorer that provide his real value.

It’s fair to question how much daylight that part of his game will receive at the NBA level, because he doesn’t create easy separation and isn’t a great distributor.

Defensively, it’s more of the same. His size and length help him get hands on balls, but he’s not some elite stopper out there. He offers some secondary rim protection but didn’t always show great awareness, and his team’s defense was consistently its undoing. Murray has long arms and can slide his feet on the ball, so he should hold up decently enough against wings and fours.

What I get back to is that we’ve seen this movie before with guys like T.J. Warren and Cedric Ceballos — smooth forwards who lacked top-drawer athleticism but had crazy feel for scoring and finding buckets in the flow of the game. The league undervalues guys like this sometimes because they don’t have an easy box to slide into, but I’m pretty confident Murray can be a rotation forward at worst, and the upside is a 20-point scorer.

Spoiler:

16. Tari Eason | 6-7 sophomore | SF | LSU

I have a sneaking suspicion that Eason’s wildness is going to work against him and cause him to slip in the draft; teams may have trouble sticking a fork into a defined role for him. Eason is a big wing with a solid frame who can guard anything from one to four, a disruptive defender whose rates of “stocks” are almost Matisse Thybulle-esque (4.5 steals and 2.5 blocks per 100 in SEC play, nearly matching what Thybulle did in the Pac 12 at the same age).

Wait, there’s more. He’s also an absurdly good rebounder for his size (15.7 rebound rate in the SEC!) and scored easily and efficiently last season. He shot 56.4 percent inside the arc with a massive free-throw rate, made 80.3 percent from the line and even hit 35.9 percent from 3 despite a funky-looking slingshot release that teams aren’t totally sure will translate to the pros. Did I mention he averaged 39.4 points per 100 possessions and had a 34.5 PER in the SEC?

So why is he down here and not in the top five? Because it’s not clear what he did — basically, putting his head down and burrowing to the rim regardless of the situation — has any utility at the next level. Eason isn’t passing — he had two turnovers for every assist, not to mention about 15 true shot attempts — and a lot of his best moments came in transition. If you don’t believe in the shooting, he may not have a role in a half-court offense; given that the previous season at Cincinnati he shot 24.1 percent from 3 and 57.4 percent from the line, this is a realistic fear.

Defensively, he is really good laterally, definitely in the top tier in this draft class. Even small guards had all kinds of trouble turning the corner against him. He has a tendency to rise up out of his stance at times, which can leave him vulnerable to a good hesi move.

However, the same pattern of overaggression bordering on recklessness that marked his offense also was his undoing on defense. Eason committed a whopping 7.7 fouls per 100 possessions in SEC play and had a particularly bad habit of crash-landing into 3-point shooters while challenging shots.

Finally, Eason is a bit older than some of the other players on this list, which is why I put guys like Brown and Griffin ahead of him.

At this point in the draft though, I think his athleticism has to win out. Eason is clearly an NBA athlete and fits a size profile that is constantly sought throughout the league. If he even gets to the 25th percentile as a half-court offensive player, his transition, rebounding and defense will make him a valuable performer.

[whitehops]

mathurin really reminds me of KCP. they're very similar size-wise, a little different athletically (KCP quicker/more agile, mathurin better vertically) and their games are pretty similar. their jump shots are even similar in that they both get a ton of elevation. KCP did have more of a reputation out of college as a defender, to be fair.

not saying their development will be the same but mathurin will have to develop his on-ball skills to be anything more than a purely off-ball player offensively.

[The Moose]

mathurin really reminds me of KCP. they're very similar size-wise, a little different athletically (KCP quicker/more agile, mathurin better vertically) and their games are pretty similar. their jump shots are even similar in that they both get a ton of elevation. KCP did have more of a reputation out of college as a defender, to be fair.

not saying their development will be the same but mathurin will have to develop his on-ball skills to be anything more than a purely off-ball player offensively.

Yep, KCP has been my comp for Mathurin too. 100% agree about the similar looking jumper. I looked I to their stat profiles a while ago too and they were very similar across most metrics.
I think Mathurin is a better vertical athlete than KCP was, but KCP the better defender.

I think that 3+D role is very likely for Mathurin though

[buzzkilloton]

mathurin really reminds me of KCP. they're very similar size-wise, a little different athletically (KCP quicker/more agile, mathurin better vertically) and their games are pretty similar. their jump shots are even similar in that they both get a ton of elevation. KCP did have more of a reputation out of college as a defender, to be fair.

not saying their development will be the same but mathurin will have to develop his on-ball skills to be anything more than a purely off-ball player offensively.

Yep, KCP has been my comp for Mathurin too. 100% agree about the similar looking jumper. I looked I to their stat profiles a while ago too and they were very similar across most metrics.
I think Mathurin is a better vertical athlete than KCP was, but KCP the better defender.

I think that 3+D role is very likely for Mathurin though

I've heard this comp on a podcast i listen to. Either you guys heard the game theory pod as well or great minds think alike on the kcp comp.

Just feels like a low upside pick for being at pick 5. Like if we were pick 7-8 I would be ok with it.

I would say between the 3 guards he does have a good chance of being the best of the 3. Just because I see both Ivey and Sharpe as boom or bust. Math is for sure the floor guy of them.

[tmorgan]

Given what I’m reading and hearing, I hope we just take Sharpe or Ivey. I’d prefer the former, but understand the latter.

If it’s Ivey, package Diallo up with Grant for whatever we can get. 7 is likely a fantasy, but it doesn’t need to be 7 to make me happy.

[zeebneeb]

Ivey and Sharpe have the highest possible ceiling, while Murray has the lowest. This is exactly what my thoughts have been.

I like Mathurin because of his potential fit next to Cade. Damn good defender, good shooter. Cade will find him for open shots, and lobs from the 2 position which would be dynamic. With that said, im not going to pretend that his ceiling is higher then Sharpe or Ivey. It really is a crap shoot, everywhere in this draft.

[vic]

Trying to warm up to Keegan..

Love his late blooming height, his fluid movement , his mature mindset and golf player mental focus. Might as well get excited.

Watch on YouTube

All I think is Obi Toppin. Some older guy who feasts on 18-19 kids then gets the NBA and is a 7th man on the Knicks.

Take any of the lottery picks and let them stay in the NCAA two more years, they will look like Jordan.

Let someone else take Obi 2.0.

Nahhh I’m not going that far, he’s way better than Obi. His rebound, steal, block numbers are better than Obi and he played in the big 10 Obi played for Dayton. His turnovers and foul rate is lower than Obi too.

Obi was mainly a dunker and a scorer who really wasn’t even that strong physically.

I’m confident Murray will be better than Obi. It’s just that he’s not as exciting as a #1 pick

[The Moose]

mathurin really reminds me of KCP. they're very similar size-wise, a little different athletically (KCP quicker/more agile, mathurin better vertically) and their games are pretty similar. their jump shots are even similar in that they both get a ton of elevation. KCP did have more of a reputation out of college as a defender, to be fair.

not saying their development will be the same but mathurin will have to develop his on-ball skills to be anything more than a purely off-ball player offensively.

Yep, KCP has been my comp for Mathurin too. 100% agree about the similar looking jumper. I looked I to their stat profiles a while ago too and they were very similar across most metrics.
I think Mathurin is a better vertical athlete than KCP was, but KCP the better defender.

I think that 3+D role is very likely for Mathurin though

I've heard this comp on a podcast i listen to. Either you guys heard the game theory pod as well or great minds think alike on the kcp comp.

Just feels like a low upside pick for being at pick 5. Like if we were pick 7-8 I would be ok with it.

I would say between the 3 guards he does have a good chance of being the best of the 3. Just because I see both Ivey and Sharpe as boom or bust. Math is for sure the floor guy of them.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2074868&p=97279107&hilit=kcp#p97279107

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2074868&p=97279485&hilit=Agreed%2C+KCP%27s+career+is+probably+his+floor#p97279485

I come with receipts haha, not sure when the podcast was though

I agree that his on ball upside seems limited by lack of handles and not great playmaking/passing. Seems like the best off ball guard in the top 10 though so I understand the fit if thats the direction they go for

[MotownMadness]

Another guy i really like is AJ Griffin but the way he moves just looks like hes damaged from his previous injuries. He does kind of give you Butler type vibes but more perimeter oriented.

[MotownMadness]

mathurin really reminds me of KCP. they're very similar size-wise, a little different athletically (KCP quicker/more agile, mathurin better vertically) and their games are pretty similar. their jump shots are even similar in that they both get a ton of elevation. KCP did have more of a reputation out of college as a defender, to be fair.

not saying their development will be the same but mathurin will have to develop his on-ball skills to be anything more than a purely off-ball player offensively.

For sure

[MotownMadness]

I think our best shot at landing a lottery pick for Grant are some ideas im seeing in the trades forum.

Basically Portland trades 7 to Charlotte for 13 and 15. They then trade us 15 for Grant or just call it a 3 way trade.

[MotownMadness]

Mathurin did look like the best fit next to Cade though when watching him in the tourney. Im just not that excited about tanking a year and ending up with him at 5.