RealGM

ATL - Risarcher, Djurisic = C-
BK -
BOS - Scheierman, Watson = D+
CHA - Salaun, Simpson = C+
CHI- Buzelis = B
CLE - Tyson = D
DAL - Ajinca = C
DEN - Holmes = B
DET - Holland, Klintman = A
GSW - Post = D
HOU - Sheppard = D
IND - Furphy, Newton, Freeman = A-
LAC - Christie = A
LAL - Knecht, Bronny = A
MEM - Edey, Wells, Spencer = D+
MIA - Ware, Larrson = B-
MIL - Johnson, Smith = A
MIN - Dillingham, Shannon = A
NO - Missi, Reeves = C-
NY - Dadiet, Kolek, McCullar, Hukporti = A+
OKC - Topic, Jones, Mitchell = C
ORL - da Silva = D
PHI - McCain, Bona = B+
PHO - Dunn, Ighodaro = A+
POR - Clingan = B+
SA - Castle, Nunez, Ingram = B+
SAC - Carter = C
TOR - Walter, Mogbo, Shead, Chomche = B
UT - Williams, Collier, Filipowski = A-
WA - Sarr, Carrington, George = A+

there's an epidemic of inept NBA front offices

btw, nobody gaf if you like draft grades or not Participate or move along, jfc

^Ya missed Williams for Utah.

Grades given expectations for the pick, A-F.

ATL - Risacher = D
BK -
BOS - Scheierman = B
CHA - Salaun = D
CHI- Buzelis = A
CLE - Tyson = D
DAL -
DEN - Holmes = B
DET - Holland = B
GSW -
HOU - Sheppard = D
IND -
LAC -
LAL - Knecht = B
MEM - Edey = C
MIA - Ware = C
MIL - Johnson = D
MIN - Dillingham, Shannon = B
NO - Missi = B
NY - Dadiet = C
OKC - Topic, Jones = B
ORL - da Silva = D
PHI - McCain = C
PHO - Dunn = B
POR - Clingan = C
SA - Castle = C
SAC - Carter = C
TOR - Walter = B
UT - Williams, Collier = B
WA - Sarr, Carrington, George = B

Minnesota did about as well as could be expected for a title contender. Their weakness is in having more than Anthony Edwards, old Conley and hobbled Monte Morris, who can actually get downhill off the dribble. Shannon and Dillingham are relentless drivers, while also being able to shoot with range. I am not sure if they'll be ready for a playoff push immediately in the West, but I love the swing Connelly and the front office took here. I don't even like Dillingham that much, but on this particular team, I can hide his defensive deficiencies.

Chuck Everett wrote:Minnesota did about as well as could be expected for a title contender. Their weakness is in having more than Anthony Edwards, old Conley and hobbled Monte Morris, who can actually get downhill off the dribble. Shannon and Dillingham are relentless drivers, while also being able to shoot with range. I am not sure if they'll be ready for a playoff push immediately in the West, but I love the swing Connelly and the front office took here. I don't even like Dillingham that much, but on this particular team, I can hide his defensive deficiencies.

Dillingham is a massive upgrade over Conley and Shannon gives them scoring punch and versatile defense. They've got to be considered favorites at this point though the Nuggets, Thunder and Suns (if they can continue to add glue guys in the 2nd round) will be right there

How does Portland get a C from you? Every one thus far has pretty easily said A

FarBeyondDriven wrote:

Chuck Everett wrote:Minnesota did about as well as could be expected for a title contender. Their weakness is in having more than Anthony Edwards, old Conley and hobbled Monte Morris, who can actually get downhill off the dribble. Shannon and Dillingham are relentless drivers, while also being able to shoot with range. I am not sure if they'll be ready for a playoff push immediately in the West, but I love the swing Connelly and the front office took here. I don't even like Dillingham that much, but on this particular team, I can hide his defensive deficiencies.

Dillingham is a massive upgrade over Conley and Shannon gives them scoring punch and versatile defense. They've got to be considered favorites at this point though the Nuggets, Thunder and Suns (if they can continue to add glue guys in the 2nd round) will be right there

He may be an upgrade over Conley (at some point), but I am not sure if he's ready for intense playoff basketball at 20 years old (in 2025). I hope he is, because Minnesota is right there. It would be great to see the Wolves two rooks come in and make their mark right away.

I never understood the point of draft grades, and I never participate. I will say I'm happy Denver traded up to land Holmes. I pretty much zeroed in on him as the only player in the 20's I wanted the Nuggets to draft. No way was he going to last that far, so good for them.

Pattycakes wrote:How does Portland get a C from you? Every one thus far has pretty easily said A

I think because he's lower on my board and they already have Ayton but tbh, Ayton is likely not long for POR so I should probably raise it to a B

Not a fan of draft grades as teams have such an information advantage over us (both when it comes to prospects as well as the direction and strategy they follow). Most of the time, grades also merely reflect discrepancies between the ranking of a player on one's own big board and the spot where they were actually selected. That's easy to just look up.

Instead, I'd rather focus on whether I do or don't understand the underlying strategy, and whether I do or don't believe in the roster fit – informed to some extent by my assessment of the prospects and their value which can never be completely avoided when talking about it. Thus the focus is on discussion rather than merely on grades without meaningful elaboration.

ATL - Risacher | I disagree with the value and would not have taken him but I can understand the reasoning behind picking a player with a clearly defined role that can hopefully help the team early on considering that the Hawks are not your usual top-of-the-draft team. They have talent and had success previously. Now, if they start selling off the talent anytime soon this would become a different matter entirely.

BOS - Scheierman | I liked him as a prospect but would have preferred drafting him with an early SRP. Still, not only is the value fine but he goes to an elite defensive team that emphasizes 3pt shooting and projects to be a contender for the foreseeable future. I'm not sure they'll play him much in the first year but he could be the internal replacement for Sam Hauser if and when he leaves after that. Makes sense to me.

CHA - Salaun | I'm not sure about this one. Let's forget the value equation for a second (I had him much lower but also admittedly have not seen enough for a confident assessment). He is, by all accounts, a pretty raw prospect. Charlotte, while rebuilding, to me is a team that should look towards making the next steps by now with LaMelo, on a max contract, and Miller as their cornerstones. Not saying they should sell assets for a push but drafting another player that projects to take a while to contribute – if he ever does – feels like a step back. Charlotte also doesn't have the best history when they opt for young but raw athletes and/or players with basketball iq concerns. Not sure if Salaun is fairly classified as one or both of that but I'm also not sure that he isn't.

CHI- Buzelis| Lots of people see this as a steal while I myself am more skeptical about him. I understand it for Chicago, though. They are currently in-between a soft rebuild and a soft push to compete and Buzelis makes some sense in this context. They hope he has some upside (young with solid size and a positive HS track record) but may also see him being able to fill a more limited role. There should also be minutes available for him as they aren't particularly well-endowed at the 4 spot. I'm fine with it.

CLE - Tyson | I don't know enough about Tyson to confidently talk about whether he was drafted too high but I can at least see the utility of a player like him in Cleveland as they look to add to their wing rotation and boost their mediocre offense.

DEN - Holmes | I am not as high on Holmes as some others but Denver needed a big man and came out with the one they liked and one of the ones ranked highest of those who were left. Thus, I understand the roster-building impetus. I would have preferred Filipowski if the purpose was to fill in the non-Jokic minutes. But they may also believe that Holmes can fit better next to Jokic (better help side defense, and better suited for the role of Aaron Gordon on offense) while also being able to play the back-up 5. If we indeed see some of the Holmes-Jokic front court, I will be able to understand their selection even as I personally had Filipowski ranked higher. So let's see what they do with him.

DET - Holland | The value is fine to me. Not great but justifiable. What I do struggle with is that Detroit yet again decides to draft an elite athlete with a questionable jumper. This is their MO but thus far I wouldn't say that it has worked out for them. Hence, I don't particularly like the fit and the apparent inflexibility when it comes to their draft approach. If they trade Ivey, as has been rumored, for someone who can shoot and create a bit then this helps to a degree. But you're still playing with Ausar, Duren and now Holland as your recent lottery selections and I'm not even sure two of them can effectively play together – much less all three of them. It also feels like Detroit is still determined to draft for upside over fit when they really should start putting a better product on the court and build a more competitive roster. Of course if you feel like the upside with the player is so much greater than with anyone else, you draft them; but I'm not sure this was the case. So color me skeptical with Detroit's choice here.

HOU - Sheppard | I'm a fan of Sheppard and think he's good value at #3 in this draft. I also do think he's a fine fit in Houston. They can use his shooting and playmaking, which also allows him to push the pace. It complements their most recent draft selections, which are primarily athletes, fairly well and could help unlock them (plus Jabari as a shooter). I'm not sure he can play a ton next to FVV but that doesn't matter too much. I'm more curious about his fit with Sengün on offense – on paper it should be fine but I'm concerned that you cannot fully maximize both of them on offense at the same time (Sheppard being better suited for a faster style of play, and both Sengün and Sheppard project to thrive in primary decision-making roles). I'm also curious to see if Sheppard, Green and Sengün can work well enough defensively. That's a bit of a concern. Overall, though, I think they can be happy with the outcome of the draft.

LAL - Knecht | Wow. Great value and feels like a seamless fit. The Lakers can be very happy with the outcome of the draft, and Knecht should be happy to play on a team that has good playmakers but can also use efficient scorers to shore up their offense. Win-win.

MEM - Edey | I love it. Edey slots directly into Adams' role as a strong rebounder and screen setter with size in the paint. It's also great that Edey goes to a good team and that Memphis gets a player that is ready to battle in the NBA. I am curious to see how he operates with Morant. It could work out well with Morant using Edey as a screener and an outlet on the roll, but it could also produce growing paints with Morant being such a paint-heavy Guard. The fit with JJJ and Bane is great, though. All in all, perfect landing spot for Edey and very sensible pick for Memphis.

MIA - Ware | Not as high on Ware as others but that's an aside. Does he make sense in Miami is the question. I have some concerns considering Miami is one of the toughest and highest-motor teams in the league – it's part of their identity – and I see Ware more as a finesse player. I think he has to change that. If there's one coaching staff and team that can get him there, though, it would be Miami. If the idea of Ware ever materializes, he makes some sense as a player who could realistically play next to as well as in place of Bam. I'm not convinced yet but I also trust the Heat as a franchise enough to give them the benefit of the doubt.

MIL - Johnson | I don't know much at all about Johnson but it seems like an odd pick for a team that has an open but limited championship window and is all-in. If he's not ready to play (and there is not much reason to believe that he is) then I really don't understand this pick. Milwaukee needs helps right now and for the next couple of seasons, and with Johnson being usually ranked lower, there also doesn't seem a good argument that he has disproportional value as a trade chip. Color me surprised.

MIN - Dillingham, Shannon | I'm fine with what they have done. They want to add to their core now and hope they can extend their window if Dillingham works next to Edwards and McDaniels – and he does look like a fit with them. Minnesota can really use his offensive punch and cover up his defensive limitations better than most or even all teams in the NBA. Of course there is a question if you should risk weakening something you're elite at in order to improve in other areas but it's worth a shot. Shannon looks like a solid fit, too. The future unprotected picks they sent out may come back to haunt them, though, so it's a risky move.

NOP - Missi | The Pelicans needed a big man and they got one. That much makes sense. I would have preferred a big man that can shoot a bit, especially with Zion living in the paint, but there are trade-offs with everyone in this range and Missi can at least help out with their rim protection. Fine choice, I think, even as I'm wait-and-see when it comes to his offensive fit.

NYK - Dadiet | Did they pick him to stash him for cap purposes? Seemed like an odd choice but if that's the case then there are limited options besides trading out of the draft entirely, and the Knicks may indeed like him. If, however, he is on a contract and on the roster next year, then I would not understand this selection with the Knicks being in contending mode and having very limited options to fill out their roster to generate meaningful depth, which should have let them to explore more ready-to-play options in the draft. So it really depends on what happens with Dadiet before I can judge the selection.

OKC - Topic, Jones | I think OKC got good value with Topic and they are one of the few teams in that draft range that can fully afford to wait for him. I'm not sure he really fits well with SGA and Williams – both of whom love to drive just as Topic does and have the ball in their hands a ton – but it's still worth a try and OKC may be able to flip him for a solid player or asset later if needed. Not sure about Jones' fit considering he too was used to having a ton of on-ball time but if they like his talent then that's fine. OKC has the luxury of not being reliant on the draft producing contributors in the short term.

ORL - da Silva | Not as high on da Silva (perhaps wrongly so, though) but Orlando seems like a good spot for him. They need offense and particularly shooting, and they have a strong defense with multiple players that have good size for their position. I think he can add something to the team and Orlando feeling like they need to round out the roster is fine by me considering that they've been ahead of schedule last year.

PHI - McCain | The 76ers can use off-ball shooting, which McCain provides, and he fits right in with his physicality, too. Ideally you would want to pair him with someone who has better size than Maxey in the backcourt but it can still work, especially if he backline defense holds. Also, McCain is likely coming off the bench for the time being anyway. So I'm very fine with Philly's choice.

PHO - Dunn | The fact that Dunn has almost no offense is a problem but that would have been a problem on any team. Phoenix has shooting and creation, and a system that relies primarily on individual brilliance rather than being a unit without weaknesses, which might help him find a role on offense or at least not handicap what Phoenix is doing as much as it would other teams (although Okogie was progressively less relied on because of his offensive limitations, so this is far from a given). I like his defensive fit and the impact he can bring on a team that is not the most athletic and does not have a great stock of individual defenders (but again, that too would have been an asset on any team). This does not address Phoenix' biggest issues but perhaps this would have been too much expect in that draft range anyways. So I'm a bit skeptical but can also understand the reasoning to some extent. It really depends on how they will use him on both ends.

POR - Clingan | Perhaps a bit too high for my taste but within reason. It makes sense to play him in spurts during his first year, so they may even be able to keep Ayton if need be. At the same time, this certainly does not help with Ayton's value around the league (to the extent that he still had notable value) and may put Portland in a worse negotiation position. Still, if Ayton is not part of their plan going forward – and that has to be assumed now – then this should not prevent them from getting their guy in the NBA. So I'll hold out a bit to see what happens with Ayton but I don't have too many qualms about the decision. He should fit well with the core they have and hopefully manages to stay healthy.

SAS - Castle | Drafted a bit too high perhaps but that is in large part due to the spot in which San Antonio picked (I could have said that about any player they had as an option). I do believe that he fits well on that team, though. Castle is unselfish on offense and adds to their defense. With the former he is not going to step on anyone's toes, and the latter is sorely needed in San Antonio. He still must find a reliable shot to be worth his draft position but that was always going to be true. The Spurs also still need to add a more dynamic on-ball creator but this draft did not have many of them and I can't fault them for not believing in any of them enough to select them there. I'm also okay with them trading the #8 pick if they are looking to add those future picks for the flexibility to make bigger trades down the road. They could have gone with Dillingham or Topic, so I'm a bit in wait-and-see mode – but if the picks are put to good use in the future and help them fill out their roster around, or add a star to, Victor then it will have been worth it.

SAC - Carter | He fits the type of player the Kings seem to like (with the return having been a bit of a mixed bag to date). He's also someone with a realistic shot to contribute in the short term with the Kings being in full playoff mode, so I see value in that. They really have to count on his jumper, though, or else I'm not sure he's the best fit around Sabonis and Fox. Fine choice but not without some question marks.

TOR - Walter | I'm not very high on Walter so the value looks at best fine to me. I do think he's a decent fit, though, and I don't think the Raptors missed out on someone very obvious that would have filled a greater need. So I'm okay with this.

UTA - Williams, Collier | If Utah commits to a fill rebuild then I do like the picks. Both are raw but have upside. Williams feels like a fit on a roster lacking true wings, whereas Collier seems a bit redundant to me. But it's not clear that George truly is a building block and guys like Sexton should not factor into your draft choices, so if they believe he was BPA in terms of upside then I can accept that. Now, if they do keep Markkanen around and do not fully commit to the tank then that's where I'd become more skeptical of their choices (but that's not only concerning those two draft picks).

WAS - Sarr, Carrington, George | Well, the Wizards started to tear it down and fully commit to a rebuild. Under these circumstances, getting three young players with upside is a great outcome for them. They all have their question marks and the latter two may or may not be long-term NBA players – but for a team like the Wizards in this particular moment, that's completely fine. Draft for upside and see where that gets you is the only sensible strategy early during a complete rebuild. Good draft in terms of selecting the players. Whether the Avdija trade was a good one remains to be seen but I think the return is enough to not be too critical of it.

Hornets fans looking back fondly at our A+ graded Bouknight/Jones draft grades and our F Miller draft grades. Such a waste of time

May as well call this thread "Players I really like and players I don't".

I think saying there's an epidemic of inept NBA front offices when you gave them a 2.6 GPA, which is the equivalent of a collective B-, is a bit of a stretch.

DOT wrote:I think saying there's an epidemic of inept NBA front offices when you gave them a 2.6 GPA, which is the equivalent of a collective B-, is a bit of a stretch.

cool

Yuri Vaultin wrote:May as well call this thread "Players I really like and players I don't".

boy, you're quick. How long did it take you to figure that out?

Just some last minute thoughts on the guys who I liked before the draft:

Kel'el Ware (Miami): If he's going to turn into the player his talent level dictates, he couldn't have picked a better environment. The Heat are going to work him like a dog. Here's hoping he meets the challenge and becomes a high-level big man. The measurables and athleticism are there.

Stephon Castle (San Antonio): Glove-like fit and will defend from Day One. Has a great support system. The fact that his dad played with Tim Duncan at Wake, just makes it kismet. He's going to end up being a gem. Wemby's gravity will unlock a lot with him.

Donovan Clingan (Portland): I am fine with him in Portland, just hope his feet will remain okay. Whether he starts right away or backs up Ayton, he is a rim runner, a screen setter, an elite rim protector and a lob threat. He is Scoot's future pressure release valve and I expect to see a frisky Blazer team in 2025. Getting rid of Brogdon for Avdija was a win as well.

Baylor Scheierman (Boston): The system the Celtics are employing will find a way to utilize this guy's skillset. The off-ball movement, the secondary connector stuff, the deep range. He definitely needs more arc, but I'm guessing in 4-5 years, he will be in the NBA 3-point contest and be looked at as one of the best three point shooters in the game. He leveled up at Creighton from South Dakota State and I know Mazzulla and Brad have to be salivating about what he can do. He is a gamer. Much more Strus than Kispert.

Kyle Filipowski (Utah): Well, I remain not a long-term fan, but I will say, ending up with the brain typer himself in Danny Ainge and a coach who is pretty creative in Will Hardy, is about the best Flip could hope for this early in his career. I said he needed to watch a lot of tape of Kelly Olynyk and he has the coach and front office guy who got the very best out of Kelly O in his career. He lucked up and I am happy for him. Hope he proves me wrong.

Jaylen Wells (Memphis): Guy is a 6'7-6'8 late bloomer, but one heck of a shooter. I expect a lot of G-League in his future, but Taylor Jenkins to me, is pound-for-pound one of the best development head coaches in basketball. There is no reason for Desmond Bane, Vince Williams, Jr., Brandon Clarke and GG Jackson to be as good as they are. It's a testament to what him and that coaching staff. This guy is going to get stronger and eventually be another one of those tall wings like Isaiah Joe, Aaron Wiggins or Naji Marshall.

Enrique Freeman (Indiana): Calling it now. Kendall Brown, it's been nice knowing you. Enrique is coming to take your lunch. Give it another year, but by December 2025, Freeman and Jarace Walker will be in the rotation for the Pacers. Furphy and Tristan Newton was a great haul as well, but this kid is the Herb Jones-like sleeper. Absolutely stunned he fell to 50, but again, another organization that always has to do more with less, so the fact that they got him where they did was beautiful.

Adem Bona (Philadelphia): Another fast twitch African big like Embiid, this kid is a hard worker, with an elite motor and athleticism. If you watched that Knicks' series, you saw Paul Reed really get exposed on both ends of the floor. Bona is a switchable defender, who can also give minutes as a small ball five. A coach like Nick Nurse is going to love Bona's energy and the fact that he can run makes him such an ideal pick and roll partner with Maxey and in transition. Darryl Morey gets a lot of **** from me, but this was an A+ pick.

Jamal Shead (Toronto): I love this kid. I have loved him since I first saw his terrible Final Four against Davion Mitchell as a freshman. He is a highly decorated NCAA player, but his anticipation defensively is what sets him a part. He does his best work off the ball and navigates screens effectively. Even bigger guards will not like going against him when they don't have the ball because he is going to make them expend a lot of energy. Jumpshot needs arc and to be a natural motion, but it's not broken. I would suggest to watch tape of D'Angelo Russell. He becomes a 35-37% from 3, even at his listed height and he could eventually find himself becoming a starter like Kyle Lowry, Fred Van Vleet and Derrick Fisher.

Isaac Jones (Sacramento, two-way): Another guy who could have easily been drafted. This is actually a great place for him because there is a pathway to minutes and a roster promotion. The Kings are one of the smallest teams in the NBA in the frontcourt and one of the least athletic (not a good combo). This guy projects to be a Carl Landry, Ryan Gomes, Craig Smith, Marcus Morris, Leon Powe, Anthony Mason, Paul Millsap type. He transferred from Idaho and immediately was one of the best players in the Pac-12 (he almost went to Houston too in the transfer portal in '23). He kind of slipped under the radar for me until the Pac-12 tournament and the NCAA's, but this guy just knows how to play basketball.

KembaWalker wrote:Hornets fans looking back fondly at our A+ graded Bouknight/Jones draft grades and our F Miller draft grades. Such a waste of time

I liked draft grades when I was a teenager, but once I became an adult I realized how dumb it was. Teams with multiple picks always get the A's, teams with one pick where they draft a guy three spots higher than guy giving the grades had him on their pointless board gets an F.

Yuri Vaultin wrote:May as well call this thread "Players I really like and players I don't".

Isn't that what all grades are?!

Klomp wrote:

Yuri Vaultin wrote:May as well call this thread "Players I really like and players I don't".

Isn't that what all grades are?!

Not really. Sometimes it's based on fit. But board like this pretty much means everyone's preexisting biases pop up. I'd like to revisit this thread in 4 years.

ATL - Risarcher, Djurisic = B-
I think it's fine. I don't think Risacher should have gone #1 but it isn't egregious. I really like Djurisic as a flier.

BOS - Scheierman, Watson = B-
I've always had a soft-spot for Anton Watson, so I don't hate grabbing him. Scheierman looks like a rotation player in the NBA.

CHA - Salaun, Simpson = C
I think they overdrafted Saluan, but it could be that he just crushed private workouts and they really did not. I LOVE Simpson, but don't like the fit on Charlotte.

CHI- Buzelis = A-
Matas fell in their lap, but I love it. High upside player on a team that is a blank slate.

CLE - Tyson = C+
They needed a wing and I like Tyson. I think they should have moved down and picked up an asset to get a similar caliber wing prospect.

DAL - Ajinca = C+
Seems fine, would have liked them to try to move up with cash to grab someone more likely to be a rotation player.

DEN - Holmes = B-
Don't hate the move up here, Holmes is a nice fit.

DET - Holland, Klintman = B+
I don't love the fit, but I do like that they picked possibly the highest upside player in the draft. I could feel better about this if they start clearing some guys out and clarify who is part of their core.

GSW - Post = C
Fine fit, but I don't think they needed to use a pick to add him.

HOU - Sheppard = B-
Good fit, I'm not this high on him, but the advance metrics suggest I should be and that has always been Houston's MO.

IND - Furphy, Newton, Freeman = A+
I don't know how Indiana could have done better given where they drafted. I don't see a need to be aggressive and move up, either, given that they got a first round caliber prospect in Furphy, and I think pretty highly of Newton. Freeman could be nice, too.

LAC - Christie = C+
Christie can't finish inside at all so I'm concerned he isn't an NBA player, but he is young and can shoot.

LAL - Knecht, Bronny = C+
I think a lot of what Knecht's reputation was in college - i.e. as a guy who can just get a bucket - just really isn't true. I do think he can hit open threes at a good clip and that's enough for this to be fine. Bronny...unless he killed workouts and was really struggling from recovering from surgery, I don't think he should have been drafted this year. I don't think it is out of the question that he eventually would have been draftable.

MEM - Edey, Wells, Spencer = C+
I trust Memphis to evaluate prospects better than I do. I don't like the fit of Edey, but we will see.

MIA - Ware, Larrson = C+
I don't like the fit of Ware but I do like the development environment for him. I don't think Larrson is an NBA player.

MIL - Johnson, Smith = B+
If you reversed the picks I'd probably give them an A- because I just think Smith is a superior prospect. I like the picks, I doubt either helps them this year.

MIN - Dillingham, Shannon = B+
Love the aggressiveness to try and make something work. Both have some scoring upside, neither are my favorite prospects, but they could be just what Minnesota needs.

NO - Missi, Reeves = C
I don't see the Missi fit. I like Reeves.

NY - Dadiet, Kolek, McCullar, Hukporti = C+
I don't like Kolek, Hukporti really needs to have developed to be a third string caliber center, I like Dadiet but if they stash him it just feels like bad asset management, and did they need another shooting guard (I like McCullar as well, but same comment). It just feels like they did not address anything they actually needed.

OKC - Topic, Jones, Mitchell = B
I trust OKC to be better at this than I am. Topic is a value play, Dillon Jones is interesting, I like Mitchell but don't get drafting two point guards.

ORL - da Silva = A
Love the value and fit.

PHI - McCain, Bona = B-
I think both of these guys can be rotation players.

PHO - Dunn, Ighodaro = B-
I LOVE Phoenix picking Oso, he is a great fit. Not convinced about Dunn, but would be okay with this if the picks were reversed.

POR - Clingan = B-
Not convinced Clingan is a franchise changer, but I think they drafted a winning player.

SA - Castle, Nunez, Ingram = C+
I don't love moving a pick for another pick 7 years in the future, but it could be worth it. Castle and Nunez are nice fits, Nunez feels like ann obvious Spurs guy. Not enamored with Ingram.

SAC - Carter = B+
I really like Carter but don't love the fit here, I think he's too good to be a 15 minute a game player and they aren't going to get the assets out of him or Monk that they should if they start cannibalizing each other's minutes.

TOR - Walter, Mogbo, Shead, Chomche = C
Really meh, really obvious that Toronto was going to draft Chomche and he was getting murdered in the BAL.

UT - Williams, Collier, Filipowski = B+
I think they made great picks for where they were, but why not try to move up from 29 to ensure you get someone you want rather than rolling the dice? Just felt like the Jazz sat on their hands.

WA - Sarr, Carrington, George = A+
Love it, everyone knows how I feel about George. Sarr I had #1 on my board, George I had #2. I also love Carrington and was hoping he'd land in Washington.