2025 Draft Thread

[payitforward]

...What we have ... a high floor moderate ceiling guy:... Bub.

How anyone can imagine that he knows what Bub Carrington's "ceiling" is beats me.

Don't get me wrong -- I don't know whether he (or Sarr or George or Johnson -- or Bilal for that matter) will have any kind of sustained NBA success or career. How would I?

But, in the exact same way, I don't know what any of their ceilings are. & neither do you. We'll find out, to be sure, but we do not know right now.

[doclinkin]

The one caveat is that GMs who know you have a glut of players at the same position might lowball you

What I just said. And what happened with Rui and Deni. They don't develop. They split minutes so they have lowered counting stats. And GMs know you need to re-shuffle for roster balance so they underbid. Roster balance matters as far as player development is concerned in other respects as well. You want guys developing chemistry with each other, in the roles they are likely to play, next to the guy who will be there in a few years. Still, talent trumps all. Best player is best player, until you have a toss-up in similar talent.

That's why teams have tiers when drafting. So they rank all players by equivalent value, regardless of position. Then pick within that tier.

Tier 0
Surefire hall of famers. Your Shaq types who are obvious franchise changers on day one.

Tier 1
Probable all stars. All-nba types.

Tier 2
Instant Starters/potential future stars

Tier 3
Solid starters, productive role players, skilled specialists

Tier 4
Bench

Or however you break it down.

If you need a PF and you are looking at two Tier 1 players, you take the PF. If the guard on your board is Tier 1 and the PF is Tier 2, you take the guard.

Currently though we have no Tier 0 or Tier 1 players. Possibly no true Tier 2 players. We have to reach for the greatest upside in long term potential. Its why we have been drafting for youth, work ethic, positional size. With a top 6 pick you are hoping to get a player in that Tier 1 slot. Some have Flagg as a Tier 0 pick since his understanding of the game is so high so early. The others I think we are all hoping the other options are Tier 1 guys, but realistically probably we are looking at Tier 2 types at best.

[dobrojim]

...What we have ... a high floor moderate ceiling guy:... Bub.

How anyone can imagine that he knows what Bub Carrington's "ceiling" is beats me.

Don't get me wrong -- I don't know whether he (or Sarr or George or Johnson -- or Bilal for that matter) will have any kind of sustained NBA success or career. How would I?

But, in the exact same way, I don't know what any of their ceilings are. & neither do you. We'll find out, to be sure, but we do not know right now.

I can try to set this up closer to the beginning of the
season but maybe we should add an additional
prediction contest next season to see who has
the clearest crystal ball. The prediction would
use Kev's PPA metric to compare our youngsters
(Bilal, Sarr, Bub, KG, Vuk, AJJ and our FRPs and maybe Colby for some reason he's an afterthought for me)
Predict their rank within this group and predict
who's PPA will improve the most next year by either
raw quantity or percentage or both.

[doclinkin]

Todays spins.
1st try. Flagg, Sorber
2nd. Harper, Sorber
3rd. Tre (#5), Sorber
4th. Ace (#3), Sorber
5th. Kon (#6), Sorber -- but I'd go: Maluach, Fleming.

Actually as I spun the wheel though I just got a good feeling with any of these pairings. You can envision a really solid team built out of this core.

Flagg. Instant defensive upgrade, instant ticket sales and a few national games featuring the golden child of the draft. Pundits start taking seriously the narrative that the Wizards are turning it around. We slot him next to Bilal, with Kyshawn as back-up to both, or occasionally play KyG as a 2 guard for unmatched length on the wings. Flagg is so skilled he can actually play as a super-guard himself. Playmaking at a premium when George and Flagg are on court. We'd still need finishers and rebounders. Hopefully we grow our own outside shooters from Bub, Key, Sarr, maybe Bilal if he can reclaim his outside efficiency from rookie season.

We'd still play Poole heavy minutes to preserve the tank, but listen to offers midseason. This coming draft is deep in ballhandling talent. Showcase Khris and Smart to gin up trade interest. Ship them for picks when they start to mess with the tank.

Harper. Dynamic synergy between Poole and Harp. Poole is one of the least efficient interior attackers but has turned it around from 3. Harper gets the benefit of tutelage from KMidd and SMart. Ideal mentors for his style of play. Both are ground bound and effective. Sarr's bombs-away style from outside opens up the interior if he improves. Harper never saw space in college, here between Sarr and Vuk we can play 5 out then give Harp the ball and stand back.

Ace. Ace may allow us to shift Poole to the bench or sub out for minutes. Playing as a super-sized 2 guard on offense, and forward on D, Ace lets us play big across the board. Let Bub direct the action as court general, Ace's job on offense is to attack whenever he touches it. Players like Kyshawn and Bub will find him when he is open. We can still preserve the tank with Poole on the bench, as Ace runs up against (and into) taller stronger players at this level. Steep learning curve but as he adjusts we benefit from his growth. Surrounded by positive and feisty players, Ace's temperament seems a good match. Picture him in Poole's role as unrepentant gunner, but this one is 6'10" and enjoys the challenge of 1-on-1 defense, even if he may get lost in team Defensive concepts for a while. Coachable kid with a good attitude joining the youngest team in the league. I like the vision of Ace taking flight towards the hoop from back door cuts to finish passes from Alex Sarr on the short roll.

Tre. Instant bucket. Like Ace he can play my-turn your-turn with Poole. And replace him by midseason. Star mindset, he loves the challenge of the spotlight. Defense has been a question mark since he has had to carry among the heaviest workloads in the NCAAs. On this team Keefe insists on defense first. Like Harper above Tre will benefit from the veterans who have won at the highest levels and can teach him to use his solid size at the guard position.

Edge. Ferocious energy. Defensive pit bull. Top tier athleticism. Hard worker. Same as above in applying the lessons taught by the vets, but he has a gear that others do not have. Skywalking booster rockets in his boots. If he picks up the defensive savvy of Marcus Smart, he can be a horrorshow at the point of attack. We have length, shotblocking, switchability, etc. What we don't really have is 84-feet defender who can press and stress the opposing lead guards. We also don't have a guard who can take full advantage of the vertical passing lanes and finish over and above the heads of defenders. Like Ace above though via pure muscle, not length.

Add Sorber, when he is healthy, and we have a heady, solid, defending rebounding, smart passing, pillar of a human being to shore up our interior muscle.

If however we land at #6 (or possibly earlier) our front office may elect to go for the epitome of positional size and take Maluach. I've already detailed how I think he could fit even with Sarr. Sarr is allergic to the paint, weak in traffic. Maluach does not even notice traffic, finishing at a godly 70% rate. Length would be jaw dropping. The intimidation factor of a player with that size has an anti-gravity effect on deterring interior penetration. Just that much hesitation can allow a player like Kyshawn to catch up and challenge a shot. Or Bilal, Sarr to come in from the weakside.

Add to Maluach a player like Rasheer Fleming who has the same wingspan as the South Sudan titan, paired with proven 40% 3pt shooting on solid volume this year. Suddenly we have size, outside shooting, unparalleled length. Muscle in the middle. Savvy all around.

Guess I'm saying I'm actually happy with all the options on the table from 1-6. We can make any of them work. The real opportunities and question marks come with who is available at 18, and if we have the ability to move up if the guy we like is taken earlier.

[payitforward]

But never, absolutely never, choose whom to draft based on what position he plays.

This part I disagree with in some part. If you have players on your board you think are of equivalent talent you pick the guy who is going to get more minutes on the squad. That way you can develop him. Too many players stacked up at the same position stunts the growth of them both and lowers their trade value. A coach will generally be biased towards the guy who knows how to play already rather than the developmental prospect. If you have five players at forward who are all young and battling each other for PT it won't help the value of any of them if you select a 6th. Teams who see you have a logjam at a position will offer less in trade than if they think you aren't pressed to clear room.

So yeah, in general, draft best player available, but if two are in the same tier, then draft the guy you don't have to make room for.

Well sure... if two guys are really equivalent in your estimation, of course you can take the guy at a position of need.

But... don't let the need dictate your estimation of the players.

[spaceman_E]

It's funny how the goal posts keep moving for Queen. Before he was supposedly a "larger version of Trae Young." I pointed out that his defense isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be. An NBA scout agrees. 'His defensive numbers actually grade out better than I’d expect. He’s a decent defender, especially in the pick-and-roll, but he doesn’t block a lot of shots, which can make it harder for a big man to stand out defensively. That said, he’s not going to get picked apart defensively. He holds his own well enough, and I wouldn’t worry about him getting cooked out there. He’s solid – just not elite on that end.”'

There are lots of people in the world that are bad at their job, this guy might be one. Or maybe he didn't watch any of the tournament games. Queen is bbq pheasant. The only argument that would make sense is he wasn't trying like Ben Simmons or Cade and I'd say he's no Cade or Ben as a prospect.

[payitforward]

The one caveat is that GMs who know you have a glut of players at the same position might lowball you

If you have a glut, someone else has a shortage -- & a glut at the position where you are short-handed. &, in any case, if you didn't have e.g. too many point guards, why would you be seeking to trade one of them?

The draft is for maximizing talent. Trades are for balancing roster positions. Try to balance your roster by drafting for position, & your team will suffer, pure & simple.

Obviously, a particular trade may work out to benefit one of the partners more than the other(s), & for that matter sometimes a GM will underestimate (or overestimate) the value of a guy he's trading (or trading for) but that shouldn't be confused with effects of intention to cheat a trading partner.

This is also why trades often involve 3 teams. Or someone adds in a different kind of value, say an expiring contract or draft capital.

Moreover, GMs are not in the business of screwing each other -- they all talk multiple times a week, they all move from team to team frequently. They need each other, & you're bound to see the guy you try to screw on another occasion, one in which he can do you harm.

Not to mention that the guy who might be tempted to lowball you has a need for your guy he's trading for. Lowballing you increases the likelihood that someone other than he winds up getting the guy he wants.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I feel strongly about my top 3. I don't think it will change unless Edgecombe's measurements are terribly disappointing.

1. F Cooper Flagg
2. G Dylan Harper
3. G V.J. Edgecombe

I'm with DcZards on Tre Johnson. I like his feel for the game, his high level shooting and his ability to find the open man. He's 6-6 with a 6-10 wingspan so I don't see defense being a huge concern here. I trust Tre more than Ace at the moment.

4. G Tre Johnson
5. F Ace Bailey

Until recently I’ve been right there with you on Edgecombe being the third best prospect. Strong body, elite athleticism, and an offensive game that steadily improved as the season went on and his confidence grew.

Then I started paying attention to Tre Johnson and checked out some of his video. That kid has the scoring gene. Does it effortlessly and from pretty much any spot on the court. And he’s both tall and long for a SG so he has the potential to be a very good defender if he wants to be.

I’d take Tre over both VE and Bailey…although I go back and forth on Bailey whose upside is probably the highest.

I feel the same way about Johnson. He has the scorer gene. Years ago, Cam Thomas led the SEC in scoring. He had a lot of detractors on draft day. Not any more.

https://netswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nba/nets/2025/04/19/nets-cam-thomas-excited-to-come-back-will-let-free-agency-play-out/83171486007/

Tre Johnson led the SEC in scoring. He could do the same years from now in the NBA.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

]Nah. They're not switching. They'll have to see him on another team.

I remember what people said about Portis. Now, he's better than Kuzma. Then he was, too. People on this board didn't think he was good enough to be a Wizard.

Nate still insists Javale McGee is terrible. I've heard Steve Kerr interviewed, saying otherwise, praising Javale. The dude has championship rings

Guys like Boozer, Millsap, Blair fail the body archetype test. Yet, a casual look at their overwhelming stats should erase doubts.

(As I typed I'm wondering about Carey, Sweetney, and Swanigan)

McGee was indeed terrible for 10 years and I stand by that. He is only a "champion" by virtue of being bad enough that he was cheap enough that championship teams could add him via the free agency to an existing championship-caliber roster.

Boozer, Millsap, and Blair played in a different era before the decline of the "power forward" position. It's notable that you have to go back 10 years to find a guy of this body type who was successful.

Portis still isn't that good. The guy has been a starter in just one season of his career, his 7th season. If Queen is the next Portis, do you seriously want to draft a bench player with the 5th pick in the draft?

As I've said before, I think Queen will be a solid pro, but I think he will be a situational guy who will get played off the floor against certain matchups. With a top 5 pick, you've got to draft a guy who can stay on the floor in the playoffs against all possible matchups, not a regular season minutes-eater who feasts on unprepared second-tier teams but gets relentlessly attacked defensively by good teams with the personnel and scouting report to do it. Even really, really good offensive centers like Sabonis and Valanciunas get killed in the playoffs because they can't anchor the defense.

If Queen was available at #18 I'd be happy. Or if we moved up from #18 to #12 or so, I'd be happy. But I don't want him with our top 5 pick.

Queen is comparable to Sengun. He's like Sabonis.

Sengun is excelling in the playoffs, which Queen would also do with agile teammates.

Have you watched Houston vs. Golden State?

Sengun is not getting killed in the playoffs. He's the matchup problem generating points, rebounds, and assists.

Queen is better than Portis. The only thing I said about Portis is that he was good for us and he is better right now than Kuzma.

The body type of Julius Randle doesn't seem to be holding him back. Draymond Green has the same body type. He's much taller, but the best player in the world has a DQ body. Nikola Jokic. Another top-3 player is also no svelte, Luka Doncic.

I'm shocked that you think Queen will be a liability on a basketball court. On a crap team like Washington!

The good news is this will be something to revisit after the draft.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

It's funny how the goal posts keep moving for Queen. Before he was supposedly a "larger version of Trae Young." I pointed out that his defense isn't nearly as bad as people make it out to be. An NBA scout agrees. 'His defensive numbers actually grade out better than I’d expect. He’s a decent defender, especially in the pick-and-roll, but he doesn’t block a lot of shots, which can make it harder for a big man to stand out defensively. That said, he’s not going to get picked apart defensively. He holds his own well enough, and I wouldn’t worry about him getting cooked out there. He’s solid – just not elite on that end.”'

And then we move the goal posts a little more. If we get a bad spot in the lottery I expect the pick to be either Maluach or Queen. We are already overloaded at guard and wing. If they think someone is special then fine. But just drafting another guard/wing to add to the group we already have and then not really have them play would be bizarre.

I expect the pick will be Maluach.

Youth with length and athleticism are the obsession of the Wizards scouting department.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

The concerns for Johnson shouldn't just be waved off. He only shot 44.9% on 2 point fg's. Do we expect that to get better or worse in the NBA? He only averaged 2.7 assists. It's very tough to be a ball dominant guard/wing if you're not passing the ball. The 3-point shot is elite and the wingspan is good but is he going to be an 3 and D guy in the NBA or is he a guy that will be an efficient 3 level scorer? In the NBA Johnson will have to deal with bigger, longer, stronger and more athletic defenders. How good is his handle? Look at the playoffs. Look at how physical they are letting them play. If this trend continues I think teams might have to really rethink their love for skinny/small players.

I don’t worry too much about efficiency #s of top college players, especially guards like Johnson who are the focal points of their team’s offense.

They typically take more shots—and more contested shots— and pass less than you would ideally want them to. But there’s a good chance that will change at the next level.

It says something that the freshman Johnson is the top rated talent in college bball’s best conference.

With a top 6 pick, you take the BPA regardless of position.

Who's to say Tre Johnson won't be a more effective rookie than Dylan Harper?

[prime1time]

We are already overloaded at guard and wing. If they think someone is special then fine. But just drafting another guard/wing to add to the group we already have and then not really have them play would be bizarre.

Here's where I disagree.

I only see one guy whom I'm reasonably confident will pan out to be an above-average starter: Bilal. Bub, Sarr George and AJ might pan out, but they might peak as 5th-8th man role players. It's too soon to tell.

But the real issue is that nobody on our roster is looking like they have more than a 10% chance of becoming a franchise-player. So if there's anybody in this draft at any position that has franchise-player potential, take him with absolutely no consideration given to anyone we already have on the roster. I'd only take Queen if I truly felt he was the best player on the board. I don't care at all that he is a center and not a wing.

I agree 1000% -- & it's independent of who's on the roster.

You ALWAYS take the best player available!

Use trades to balance your roster. & if you've done a good job drafting the bpa, why then you have plenty of player capital to make advantageous trades.

But never, absolutely never, choose whom to draft based on what position he plays.

Plus, I agree with nate that we don't have anyone who's a lock to be a terrific player. Not even Bilal does, to tell the truth....

So you'd be an advocate for a team drafting a PG 10 years in a row? Or a Center 10 years in a row?

[nate33]

Here's where I disagree.

I only see one guy whom I'm reasonably confident will pan out to be an above-average starter: Bilal. Bub, Sarr George and AJ might pan out, but they might peak as 5th-8th man role players. It's too soon to tell.

But the real issue is that nobody on our roster is looking like they have more than a 10% chance of becoming a franchise-player. So if there's anybody in this draft at any position that has franchise-player potential, take him with absolutely no consideration given to anyone we already have on the roster. I'd only take Queen if I truly felt he was the best player on the board. I don't care at all that he is a center and not a wing.

I agree 1000% -- & it's independent of who's on the roster.

You ALWAYS take the best player available!

Use trades to balance your roster. & if you've done a good job drafting the bpa, why then you have plenty of player capital to make advantageous trades.

But never, absolutely never, choose whom to draft based on what position he plays.

Plus, I agree with nate that we don't have anyone who's a lock to be a terrific player. Not even Bilal does, to tell the truth....

So you'd be an advocate for a team drafting a PG 10 years in a row? Or a Center 10 years in a row?

No. I wouldn't draft Paul George 10 years in a row because he is an All-NBA caliber player. Once I had two guys like that at forward, I would look to fill other positions. But I would be willing to draft Paul George if I had 9 Derrick Jones's on the roster.

[bgroban]

Give me Harper all day, every day.

He will be a perennial All-Star.

[Frichuela]

]Nah. They're not switching. They'll have to see him on another team.

I remember what people said about Portis. Now, he's better than Kuzma. Then he was, too. People on this board didn't think he was good enough to be a Wizard.

Nate still insists Javale McGee is terrible. I've heard Steve Kerr interviewed, saying otherwise, praising Javale. The dude has championship rings

Guys like Boozer, Millsap, Blair fail the body archetype test. Yet, a casual look at their overwhelming stats should erase doubts.

(As I typed I'm wondering about Carey, Sweetney, and Swanigan)

McGee was indeed terrible for 10 years and I stand by that. He is only a "champion" by virtue of being bad enough that he was cheap enough that championship teams could add him via the free agency to an existing championship-caliber roster.

Boozer, Millsap, and Blair played in a different era before the decline of the "power forward" position. It's notable that you have to go back 10 years to find a guy of this body type who was successful.

Portis still isn't that good. The guy has been a starter in just one season of his career, his 7th season. If Queen is the next Portis, do you seriously want to draft a bench player with the 5th pick in the draft?

As I've said before, I think Queen will be a solid pro, but I think he will be a situational guy who will get played off the floor against certain matchups. With a top 5 pick, you've got to draft a guy who can stay on the floor in the playoffs against all possible matchups, not a regular season minutes-eater who feasts on unprepared second-tier teams but gets relentlessly attacked defensively by good teams with the personnel and scouting report to do it. Even really, really good offensive centers like Sabonis and Valanciunas get killed in the playoffs because they can't anchor the defense.

If Queen was available at #18 I'd be happy. Or if we moved up from #18 to #12 or so, I'd be happy. But I don't want him with our top 5 pick.

Queen is comparable to Sengun. He's like Sabonis.

Sengun is excelling in the playoffs, which Queen would also do with agile teammates.

Have you watched Houston vs. Golden State?

Sengun is not getting killed in the playoffs. He's the matchup problem generating points, rebounds, and assists.

Queen is better than Portis. The only thing I said about Portis is that he was good for us and he is better right now than Kuzma.

The body type of Julius Randle doesn't seem to be holding him back. Draymond Green has the same body type. He's much taller, but the best player in the world has a DQ body. Nikola Jokic. Another top-3 player is also no svelte, Luka Doncic.

I'm shocked that you think Queen will be a liability on a basketball court. On a crap team like Washington!

The good news is this will be something to revisit after the draft.

Actually, your comparison of Queen to Şengün is compelling. In particular because, like Şengün, Queen would be surrounded by athletes (Sarr, Bilal).

[prime1time]

I agree 1000% -- & it's independent of who's on the roster.

You ALWAYS take the best player available!

Use trades to balance your roster. & if you've done a good job drafting the bpa, why then you have plenty of player capital to make advantageous trades.

But never, absolutely never, choose whom to draft based on what position he plays.

Plus, I agree with nate that we don't have anyone who's a lock to be a terrific player. Not even Bilal does, to tell the truth....

So you'd be an advocate for a team drafting a PG 10 years in a row? Or a Center 10 years in a row?

No. I wouldn't draft Paul George 10 years in a row because he is an All-NBA caliber player. Once I had two guys like that at forward, I would look to fill other positions. But I would be willing to draft Paul George if I had 9 Derrick Jones's on the roster.

So you agree with me lol. To reference what I originally said...

If they think someone is special then fine. But just drafting another guard/wing to add to the group we already have and then not really have them play would be bizarre.

If you think a player is special and better than who we already have then draft them. To bring it back to the 2025 NBA Draft, who are the stars in this draft after Flagg and Harper. Who can you point to and say, "I believe in them so much that I'd be willing to draft him and prioritize his growth over other players that we've drafted at similar positions." For me Ace Bailey is that guy so I have him at 3. After that none of these guys are on that level for me, so I move to Maluach and Queen. Obviously the Wizards management good disagree with me and/or my opinion could change but that's where I'm at right now.

[nate33]

So you'd be an advocate for a team drafting a PG 10 years in a row? Or a Center 10 years in a row?

No. I wouldn't draft Paul George 10 years in a row because he is an All-NBA caliber player. Once I had two guys like that at forward, I would look to fill other positions. But I would be willing to draft Paul George if I had 9 Derrick Jones's on the roster.

So you agree with me lol. To reference what I originally said...

If they think someone is special then fine. But just drafting another guard/wing to add to the group we already have and then not really have them play would be bizarre.

If you think a player is special and better than who we already have then draft them. To bring it back to the 2025 NBA Draft, who are the stars in this draft after Flagg and Harper. Who can you point to and say, "I believe in them so much that I'd be willing to draft him and prioritize his growth over other players that we've drafted at similar positions." For me Ace Bailey is that guy so I have him at 3. After that none of these guys are on that level for me, so I move to Maluach and Queen. Obviously the Wizards management good disagree with me and/or my opinion could change but that's where I'm at right now.

I believe anyone in the top 5 has the potential to be better than everyone on our roster. If I like Tre Johnson over Maluach, I'm taking him without hesitation, with no regard for positional need. There is nobody on our roster that is clearly good enough to influence my draft assessment.

[tontoz]

I am not interested in Maluach because i dont think he is that good. His stock and dreb numbers were low for his size. He wasn't playing many minutes so he didn't have to worry about fatigue or foul trouble. I don't see anything special about him other than size, and he plays smaller than his size. I dont see a high motor guy and motor is a big issue for centers.

And lets not forget that he won't be able to get back into the country if he leaves lol.

[prime1time]

No. I wouldn't draft Paul George 10 years in a row because he is an All-NBA caliber player. Once I had two guys like that at forward, I would look to fill other positions. But I would be willing to draft Paul George if I had 9 Derrick Jones's on the roster.

So you agree with me lol. To reference what I originally said...

If they think someone is special then fine. But just drafting another guard/wing to add to the group we already have and then not really have them play would be bizarre.

If you think a player is special and better than who we already have then draft them. To bring it back to the 2025 NBA Draft, who are the stars in this draft after Flagg and Harper. Who can you point to and say, "I believe in them so much that I'd be willing to draft him and prioritize his growth over other players that we've drafted at similar positions." For me Ace Bailey is that guy so I have him at 3. After that none of these guys are on that level for me, so I move to Maluach and Queen. Obviously the Wizards management good disagree with me and/or my opinion could change but that's where I'm at right now.

I believe anyone in the top 5 has the potential to be better than everyone on our roster. If I like Tre Johnson over Maluach, I'm taking him without hesitation, with no regard for positional need. There is nobody on our roster that is clearly good enough to influence my draft assessment.

I respect that. But I'll also hold you to it going forward. Also, that could be your conviction about Johnson, but what's also true is that he is not a consensus elite player like Harper or Flagg. And we aren't the ones making the pick. I'd be surprised if we draft Johnson over Maluach or Queen. Unless we just plan on handing the offense over to Johnson we're basically drafting a 3 and player top 5.

There are questions for Johnson to answer in the predraft process that will play a role in where he is selected: Scouts wonder at times how directly his ball-dominant style translates to winning, and whether he'll be willing to defer and play more of a secondary scoring role in the NBA. Those concerns were abetted by the fact he shot 44.9% on 2-point attempts this season, a concerning number, particularly for a player with his usage level.He is not a consistent defender either, placing greater significance on whether Johnson can be efficient, sharpen his shot selection and learn to make teammates better.

I don't think Johnson was better than Bub as a freshman and I don't think Johnson is better than Bub right now. I think Johnson bad 2-point percentage will make him avoid the paint in the NBA and could lead to him posting a really dismal fg% in his first year. He's not a guy I would draft over Maluach and I would actually like Kon Knueppel over him. He's simply to inefficient. Compare his 2-point fg % to other big time guards drafted in the top 5. It's not good and definitely a red flag.

[tontoz]

I don't think Johnson was better than Bub as a freshman and I don't think Johnson is better than Bub right now.

Bub went 14 in a weak draft. Tre is projected 4-6 in a much stronger draft.

Tre was the leading scorer in the strongest conference in history as a freshman. His BPM was double Bub's. He is clearly a better prospect than Bub.

If is funny how primtime talks about Tre being inefficient given that he had a higher TS than Bub on greater volume against tougher competition.