2025 Draft Thread - Part 3

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Thing is - he rebounds like a SG/SF and likes about as much contact. I don't think it is his size or strength that is the issue.

I am with CCJ on this one, I think he needs to be moved to PF or paired with a rebounding machine of a PF.

My 1/2 cent.

Hyperbole. At age 19, he averaged 8.6 rebounds per 36, which beats every SF and PF on the roster except the freakishly good rebounding Champagnie.

The whole point of Sarr is to give us a defensively switchable 5 which is almost a necessity in the league these days, at least against some matchups.

Sarr will get stronger. I don’t expect him to ever be a dominant rebounder, but he will rebound well enough to play center 20 minutes a night. And that’s where he will be a difference-making player.

How do you think floor-bound Queen will rebound per-36?

[dckingsfan]

Probably will change my opinion as the draft gets closer. As of now, I'd take Maluach and Sorber at 6 & 18 and use 40 + a couple og 2 seconds to take Hugo in the late 20s

I don’t see a rationale to take two centers in this draft. Sarr is going to spend probably half of his time at center in the coming seasons, leaving only about 25-30 minutes a game available at the position for other players.

Well, it would be about the FO's rationale. If they think the BPA are Cs, well then. Or possibly, they think Sarr can transition to a PF and drafting Cs is okay as well (my bias is I think Sarr could be a really good PF, not that those things ever interfere with viewpoint ).

So, I am not saying that is what the FO will do. I think they will either take Maluach at 6 and wings and guards with their remaining picks or take a C with the 18th pick. That would be my guess anyway.

But if they do draft 2 Cs and are thinking the other players they want are in the '26 class. I am good with that as well. I am also good with them taking a PG & C if they have their '26 draft planned out.

[NatP4]

Best comparisons I can think of for CMB:

Xavier Tillman, Brandon Clarke, P.J. Washington, Aaron Gordon, Paul Millsap, Draymond Green.

And he was better than all of them as a NCAA freshman.

[dobrojim]

Probably will change my opinion as the draft gets closer. As of now, I'd take Maluach and Sorber at 6 & 18 and use 40 + a couple og 2 seconds to take Hugo in the late 20s

I don’t see a rationale to take two centers in this draft. Sarr is going to spend probably half of his time at center in the coming seasons, leaving only about 25-30 minutes a game available at the position for other players.

I do.

Sarr sucks. Players eat him alive defensively. Alex is totally inept scoring inside.

Draft both Queen and Sorber or Maluach and Sorber because they will advance Sarr's development. Practices will be competitive. Someone will earn trade value worst-case. Let the worst of the two play in G-League.

Sarr is the only big man on a team full of guards and swing men. There is room to draft bigs. That is who the Wizards need. Quality bigs.

I believe our priority needs to be a player that can
allow Sarr to play the 4 at least half the time, like
Mobley in CLE or Chet in OKC.

By the way, the idea that Sarr sucks seems a bit extreme.
He played the 5 more/less all year as a skinny 19 yo.
Of course he got pushed around. Let him play the 4
25-30 min a game after he's gotten stronger. With Maluach
or Sorber at the 5.

That said, if you really think KK/Tre/Edge/Ace are a
tier above whoever (for me Maluach) the Wiz want to
draft as their future 5, you probably have to take them. But Maluach has great upside. Speaking of which, I think
Vuk showed signs. I wouldn't discard him.

[doclinkin]

Probably will change my opinion as the draft gets closer. As of now, I'd take Maluach and Sorber at 6 & 18 and use 40 + a couple og 2 seconds to take Hugo in the late 20s

I don’t see a rationale to take two centers in this draft. Sarr is going to spend probably half of his time at center in the coming seasons, leaving only about 25-30 minutes a game available at the position for other players.

Sorber may be rehabbing surgery for part of the season. Yes we need developmental minutes for all our players, but a staggered start is one way to do it. Similar to how we were able to integrate AJJ late in the year after Bub played heavy early.

Drafting for Bub didn’t stop the Wiz from landing a 2nd guard last year in AJJ. Nor for landing guard/wing KGeorge while we were developing Bilal.

Some drafts are deep in guards others in bigs. This year the strength of the draft is the ranks of the giants. This team is not good enough to ignore talent at any position, we have to draft for depth as well as talent.

Positional redundancy is one way to tank. A well balanced team is more likely to win. Redundancy in bigs is often necessary. They’re more vulnerable to load management issues. Ask Embiid. You reduce wear and tear. Let them play high intensity effective minutes then drop out for a rest.

If we are looking for future dominance, locking in the two longest and strongest players in the draft sets us up for the future. There’s not overlap in skill set, in fact the trio of young bigs each has something the others lack and could benefit from.

Sorber has advanced understanding of the game. Screen setting. Playmaking. Pick and roll nuance. Steals. Boxing out. Defensive rebounding. These are skills that Maluach in particular lacks. Has not been exposed to. Needs most in order to take the leap. Sarr too in some cases.

Having a strong foil to go up against in practice will benefit Khaman the way Sarr was helped by Valanciunas. Only this one is a younger version who can help him grow side by side. Stone sharpening iron.

Valanciunas also helped Bub a ton. Learning that two man game will boost Carrington’s game as well as Maluach’s. Sorber already knows the role. Maluach is simply bigger. If not stronger. It’s neck and neck who is tougher there.

The defensive skill of a player like Sorber also helps you find useful minutes for a no defense finesse big like Vukcevic especially while Khaman is still learning the role. We can still go huge without surrendering all defensive principles.

To me if you can add dominant strength and size in the front court early, especially while you are catching a far more talented player late with an injury discount, you jump at the chance. There are guards every year. Young playable true freshman centers are rare.

The upside on that kind of precocious play from a big is unknown. The form on his jumper looks better than the results. Should be possible to eventually extend the range and effectiveness of that FT line j he takes. He’s so polished so young. Does he improve from that head start? That’s what intrigues everyone about Flagg, that he’s a veteran from day 1 so maybe he grows from there. But bigs usually develop slow. Could Sorber improve from here? Where’s that top out. You like Wolf. Sorber is better than the freshman Danny Wolf.

Then imagine if Maluach also develops that 3 ball he uncorked in Africa play. As he has showed off in workouts. That outside face up game. With the perimeter defense he was tasked with at Duke. Two giants with 7’6” wingspans able to body up and bully opponents. Either in platoons or on court together in some matchups. The enormity. Sorber protecting the basket while Khaman smothers Wemby. Chet. Jokic. Embiid. Mobley.

Then consider the big-to-big passing in playoff ball. Huge skilled passers like Sorber and Sarr lofting the ball to Maluach in motion. That’s the goal. Bury opponents with skilled size. High percentage interior scoring. Ball control. Win the possession game. Choke out the high variance streakiness of the 3pt game.

Seems to me a vision worth getting in on early before someone else does. Rumors have it that the Spurs are interested in Maluach at 10. Picture him next to Wemby. Now picture Sorber. Either image works. You want to let them steal the vision and dominate the playscape for the next decade? Why not get in on the ground floor early and force everyone else to adjust. Not race to play catch up.

Best youngest longest smartest positionally dominant talented player available. That’s what we should pick. In this case that may mean we lock up the front court of the future. I’m fine with that.

[Hibachi_0]

I don’t see a rationale to take two centers in this draft. Sarr is going to spend probably half of his time at center in the coming seasons, leaving only about 25-30 minutes a game available at the position for other players.

Sorber may be rehabbing surgery for part of the season. Yes we need developmental minutes for all our players, but a staggered start is one way to do it. Similar to we were able to integrate AJJ late in the year after Bub played heavy early.

Drafting for Bub didn’t stop the Wiz from landing a 2nd guard last year in AJJ. Nor for landing guard/wing KGeorge while we were developing Bilal.

Some drafts are deep in guards others in bigs. This year the strength of the draft is the ranks of the giants. This team is not good enough to ignore talent at any position, we have to draft for depth as well as talent.

Positional redundancy is one way to tank. A well balanced team is more likely to win. Redundancy in bigs is often necessary. They’re more vulnerable to load management issues. Ask Embiid. You reduce wear and tear. Ket them play high intensity effective minutes then drop out for a rest.

If we are looking fit future dominance, locking in the two longest and strongest players in the draft sets us up for the future. There’s not overlap in skill set, in fact the trio of young bigs each has something the others lack and could benefit from.

Sorber has advanced understanding of the game. Screen setting. Playmaking. Pick and roll nuance. Steals. Boxing out. Defensive rebounding. These are skills that Maluach in particular lacks. Has not been exposed to. Needs most in order to take the leap. Sarr too in some cases.

Having a strong foil to go up against in practice will benefit Khaman the way Sarr was helped by Valanciunas. Only this one is a younger version who can help him grow side by side. Stone sharpening iron.

Valanciunas also helped Bub a ton. Learning that two man game will boost Carrington’s game as well as Maluach’s. Sorber already knows the role. Maluach is simply bigger. If not stronger. It’s neck and neck who is tougher there.

The defensive skill of a player like Sorbet also helps you find useful minutes for a no defense finesse big like Vukcevic especially while Khaman is still learning the role. We can still go huge without surrendering all defensive principles.

To me if you can add dominant strength and size in the front court early, especially while you are catching a far more talented player late with an injury discount, you jump at the chance. There are guards every year. Young playable true freshman centers are rare.

The upside on that kind of precocious play from a big is unknown. The form on his jumper looks better than the results. Should be possible to eventually extend the range and effectiveness of that FT line j he takes. He’s so polished so young. Does he improve from that head start? That’s what intrigues everyone about Flagg, that he’s a veteran from day 1 so maybe he grows from there. But bigs usually develop slow. Could Sorber improve from here? Where’s that top out. You like Wolf. Sorber is better than the freshman Danny Wolf.

Then imagine if Maluach also develops that 3 ball he uncorked in Africa play. As he has showed off in workouts. That outside face up game. With the perimeter defense he was tasked with at Duke. Two giants with 7’6” wingspans able to body up and bully opponents. Either in platoons or on court together in some matchups. The enormity. Sorber protecting the basket while Khaman smothers Wemby. Chet. Jokic. Embiid. Mobley.

Then consider the big-to-big passing in playoff ball. Huge skilled passers like Sorber and Sarr lofting the ball to Maluach in motion. That’s the goal. Bury opponents with skilled size. High percentage interior scoring. Ball control. Win the possession game. Choke out the high variance streak ones of the 3pt game.

Seems to me a vision worth getting in on early before someone else does. Rumors have it that the Spurs are interested in Maluach at 10. Picture him next to Wemby. Now picture Sorber. Either image works. You want to let them steal the vision and dominate the playscape for the next decade? Why not get in on the ground floor early and force everyone else to adjust. Not race to play catch up.

Best youngest longest smartest positionally dominant talented player available. That’s what we should pick. In this case that may mean we lock up the front court of the future. I’m fine with that.

The rationale is that I believe Maluach and Sorber are the BPA if we can draft them at 6&18. We are cooler than we've ever been since the Wall/Beal era, but sadly, pretty bad at basketball so I'd draft the best player we can. If Sorber falls to 18 I believe is due to his injury, otherwise I doubt he'd be available there.

In terms of fit, I align with doc's ideas (he presented them much better than I would have). I would only add that if Sarr still can devolp into a full time center, he also still has the potential to develop into a Gianniesque player. In that case, the Sarr - Maluach (+ Sorber) frontcourt, potential-wise is as good as it gets.

[closg00]

Per Givony, Maluach & Traore does make sense. A big talent add in that pair! Ditto if it were to be McNeeley at 18 instead pf Traore.

Their big board shows Johni Broome still available at 40. IMO, he's an absolutely can't-miss NBA prospect, a guy who's going to have a long, productive career in the league. Not a star, not a primary scorer, but a stud all the same.

As an alternative to Broome, Woo pencils in Toohey. Anyone have a take on him?

Broome is a can't miss. So is Clifford. So is Richardson.

Good discussion about Jase on the GB.
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2442196

[Hibachi_0]

Read on Twitter

Interesting and not ideal. If we moved to 3 I'd lean towards Ace. In terms of volume breakdown would be cool to see how it comperes to Fears.

[tontoz]

Yeah when i watched VJ i didn't see much shot creation. That is why i prefer Tre and Ace above him.

[NatP4]

Think I’ll stay away from trading up to #3. Every single year, there is a bust in the top 3 picks. It’s not going to be Harper or Flagg.

[nate33]

The rationale is that I believe Maluach and Sorber are the BPA if we can draft them at 6&18. We are cooler than we've ever been since the Wall/Beal era, but sadly, pretty bad at basketball so I'd draft the best player we can. If Sorber falls to 18 I believe is due to his injury, otherwise I doubt he'd be available there.

In terms of fit, I align with doc's ideas (he presented them much better than I would have). I would only add that if Sarr still can devolp into a full time center, he also still has the potential to develop into a Gianniesque player. In that case, the Sarr - Maluach (+ Sorber) frontcourt, potential-wise is as good as it gets.

I think the center position is a unique case where you can't just blindly apply the "draft BPA" mantra.

The problem with centers is that you really can't play two centers at the same time. (And I'm talking about true centers here, not a PF/C hybrid like Sarr.) It's not like having three redundant small forwards. You can play 3 small forwards at the same time with little difficulty so if you already have two good SF's on the roster and a SF is the BPA, you just take him and figure it out later. You can easily slide one of your SF's to PF or SG without too much consequence. It's what we're doing right now with Bilal, George and Champagnie, for example.

But if we had Maluach and Sorber, they absolutely could not share minutes on the court. And Sarr is going to play some C minutes just because game conditions will dictate the need for a switchable center in certain matchups, or a center than can shoot. So we are talking about just 25-30 center minutes available at the most. It's just a really bad idea to use a FRP on a position that you know full well you will have virtually no minutes available, and no feasible why to finagle the lineups to find minutes.

[nate33]

Best comparisons I can think of for CMB:

Xavier Tillman, Brandon Clarke, P.J. Washington, Aaron Gordon, Paul Millsap, Draymond Green.

And he was better than all of them as a NCAA freshman.

I like CMB a lot, but I don't see the Aaron Gordon comparison because he lacks the outlier athleticism. And although I think he is the closest thing we've seen to Draymond Green, it's never wise to assume anyone has Draymond Green's all-time-great defensive instincts.

So that leaves the other 4 guys: Tillman, Clarke, PJ and Millsap. I think those are reasonably good comparisons.

But how many of those 4 guys would you really draft with a #6 pick? Millsap to be sure. Maybe PJ, but he's not exactly a home run pick at #6. And the other two guys would be modest disappointments at #6 because they're rotation players, not starters.

[nate33]

I believe our priority needs to be a player that can
allow Sarr to play the 4 at least half the time, like
Mobley in CLE or Chet in OKC.

By the way, the idea that Sarr sucks seems a bit extreme.
He played the 5 more/less all year as a skinny 19 yo.
Of course he got pushed around. Let him play the 4
25-30 min a game after he's gotten stronger. With Maluach
or Sorber at the 5.

That said, if you really think KK/Tre/Edge/Ace are a
tier above whoever (for me Maluach) the Wiz want to
draft as their future 5, you probably have to take them. But Maluach has great upside. Speaking of which, I think
Vuk showed signs. I wouldn't discard him.

I agree that this draft is a great opportunity to come away with a true center so that we can then strategically apply Sarr's versatility to play either PF or C to our advantage.

I'm interested in Maluach and would be okay with us drafting him at #6. And if we didn't end up with Maluach, there are a couple of real good center prospects that seem poised to slide to #18 (Sorber and Wolf) who also interest me a great deal. I'm just saying it's a real bad idea to draft both. There are enough interesting options at #18 that I don't see a scenario where a center prospect is so much better than other prospects that the BPA mantra overrides positional need.

Note, I'd be okay with another center at #40 because I view SRP's as an opportunity for high risk/high reward gambles.

[doclinkin]

I think the center position is a unique case where you can't just blindly apply the "draft BPA" mantra.

The problem with centers is that you really can't play two centers at the same time. (And I'm talking about true centers here, not a PF/C hybrid like Sarr.) It's not like having three redundant small forwards. You can play 3 small forwards at the same time with little difficulty so if you already have two good SF's on the roster and a SF is the BPA, you just take him and figure it out later. You can easily slide one of your SF's to PF or SG without too much consequence. It's what we're doing right now with Bilal, George and Champagnie, for example.

But if we had Maluach and Sorber, they absolutely could not share minutes on the court. And Sarr is going to play some C minutes just because game conditions will dictate the need for a switchable center in certain matchups, or a center than can shoot. So we are talking about just 25-30 center minutes available at the most. It's just a really bad idea to use a FRP on a position that you know full well you will have virtually no minutes available, and no feasible why to finagle the lineups to find minutes.

Given the youth and relative inexperience of the big kid from Sudan and the injury issues of the Georgetown kids foot, I think you can juggle minutes early.

I think adding a player like Sorber replaces the need of veteran like Holmes on the roster. You get the equivalent in a younger player on a cheaper contract.

The rest is gladiator school. It does require heavy minutes at power forward for the young Frenchman while the two big boys jostle for minutes in the front court. But once you’ve demonstrated that one or the other is dominant, and the back up is still pretty good, you have a trade piece.

Normally I argue against this sort of thing. Too many players to draft at once in the same position means you reduce the value of the guys you have for trade. But in this case, I think The timeline plays out well. You can better afford to slow play the development of the big African, until he is able to take the role from Sorber full time.

[NatP4]

Best comparisons I can think of for CMB:

Xavier Tillman, Brandon Clarke, P.J. Washington, Aaron Gordon, Paul Millsap, Draymond Green.

And he was better than all of them as a NCAA freshman.

I like CMB a lot, but I don't see the Aaron Gordon comparison because he lacks the outlier athleticism. And although I think he is the closest thing we've seen to Draymond Green, it's never wise to assume anyone has Draymond Green's all-time-great defensive instincts.

So that leaves the other 4 guys: Tillman, Clarke, PJ and Millsap. I think those are reasonably good comparisons.

But how many of those 4 guys would you really draft with a #6 pick? Millsap to be sure. Maybe PJ, but he's not exactly a home run pick at #6. And the other two guys would be modest disappointments at #6 because they're rotation players, not starters.

I might throw out Brandon Clarke actually. He was a bench player at San Jose state as a Freshman, while CMB was one of the best players in country at 18 years old. Clarke also measured with wing size, 6’8 wingspan compared to CMB at just under 7’1.

I don’t think you can throw out the Draymond comparison, just because the player is rare. It’s the closest comparison in terms of production and measurables. Have a hard time remembering a prospect with this level of defensive instincts+potential defensive impact. Again, CMB was better than ALL of these guys as an 18 year old Freshman. Came back and did it again as a Sophomore on a terrible team.

Still, like this range of outcomes:
Low end: Tillman
Medium: P.J. Washington
High end: Draymond/Millsap

[payitforward]

I don’t think anyone here seriously thinks Queen is the next Joker.

You gotta keep in mind that AFM is the board’s court jester.

You see what they do? First COSC calls me A Fukn' Moron and now I'm reduced to a humble clown. Anyone else want to kick me while I'm down, I'm defenseless.

Au contraire. Being called a court jester is a compliment.

On court jesters:
“They possessed a unique privilege, allowing them to tease and make light of the nobility without being punished....”

Right! As AFM does to moi.

[nate33]

Thing is - he rebounds like a SG/SF and likes about as much contact. I don't think it is his size or strength that is the issue.

I am with CCJ on this one, I think he needs to be moved to PF or paired with a rebounding machine of a PF.

My 1/2 cent.

Hyperbole. At age 19, he averaged 8.6 rebounds per 36, which beats every SF and PF on the roster except the freakishly good rebounding Champagnie.

The whole point of Sarr is to give us a defensively switchable 5 which is almost a necessity in the league these days, at least against some matchups.

Sarr will get stronger. I don’t expect him to ever be a dominant rebounder, but he will rebound well enough to play center 20 minutes a night. And that’s where he will be a difference-making player.

How do you think floor-bound Queen will rebound per-36?

I think Queen will be a solid rebounder at the NBA level - better than Sarr to be sure.

My problem with Queen is that I think NBA guards will blow past him like a pylon whenever he is caught in a switch. And if he plays drop coverage, he lacks the length and athleticism to effectively backpedal and guard both the penetrating guard and the lob threat. Teams will compromise our defense on every single position, forcing us into help rotations and yielding open corner 3's all night. He'll need to be the next Jokic on offense to offset his detrimental affect on our defense. And while I think he is good offensively, I don't think he is Jokic.

He'll probably be something like Demarcus Cousins. Cousins put up numbers and had lots of fans who thought he was good, but he was actually an awful player who won 33 games or less in 8 of his 9 healthy seasons. (He had one winning season as 3rd fiddle to Anthony Davis and Jrue, but even in that season, the team has a .562 winning percentage in 48 games with him, and a .618 winning percentage in 34 games without him.)

[nate33]

Still, like this range of outcomes:
Low end: Tillman
Medium: P.J. Washington
High end: Draymond/Millsap

Yeah, that's probably about right, but I'm concerned that it's tilted a little more toward the low end. It's not like a 33% chance of each. It's more like 40% of low end, 40% of medium, and 20% of high. I like those odds with the #18 pick, but I'm not excited about it at #6.

[payitforward]

If we pick Maluach (& I sure hope we do), I can't get behind taking Sorber at 18.

But, if he's still on the board & someone wants him a lot, I can easily see the possibility of a useful trade. E.g. 18 & 40 for 19 & 36 would be a terrific trade for us -- we could walk away with Maluach, Murray-Boyles, & either Johni Broome or a solid guard/wing prospect -- say Kam Jones/Drake Powell.

[NatP4]

Still, like this range of outcomes:
Low end: Tillman
Medium: P.J. Washington
High end: Draymond/Millsap

Yeah, that's probably about right, but I'm concerned that it's tilted a little more toward the low end. It's not like a 33% chance of each. It's more like 40% of low end, 40% of medium, and 20% of high. I like those odds with the #18 pick, but I'm not excited about it at #6.

Totally fair. I think it’s closer to a 5% chance of the lower end outcome. Relates to him never developing as a passable shooter and being drafted to a team that views him as exclusively a rotation backup hustle C. A moderate 30-40% chance at medium outcome, and a likely high end outcome.

I would take him at 6 with no hesitation.