Top Prospects
Dybantsa
Boozer
Wilson
To me, all of these three guys are prospects you would be content drafting with the first pick in a regular draft. That makes it a very strong draft at the top in my eyes. For me, Dybantsa is still a step ahead of the other two. While Boozer and Wilson are solid first-pick prospects, Dybantsa is somewhere between solid and exceptional first pick.
Spoiler:
Dybantsa just has star written all over him and should be one of the league's premier scorers for a long time. His athleticism is next level – elite first step, incredible long strides, vertical explosion, great length and decent strength – and he combines it with great footwork, high-level creativity and instincts when it comes to the movements of his defenders, a strong finishing and midrange game, very solid handles with the ability to create separation, and an awesome attacking mindset that allows him to score a ton in the paint and at the line. At the same time, he'll need to improve in other areas (playmaking, defense, off-ball play plus shooting) to ensure that he contributes in ways beyond on-ball scoring and that his impact matches the production that I'm confident he'll have. He doesn't start from zero, fortunately. He has shown very solid playmaking ability from the wing position (leveraging his scoring threat) and he obviously has the tools to become an efficient cutter and attack close-outs. His defense has been subpar for his tools (lack of effort at times, not a great feel for rotations and therefore not an effective help defender, flawed technique means he is prone to losing touch with his match-up) but he had stretches where the effort was solid enough to – in combination with his physical tools – not stick out as a negative. I don't think he'll ever be a good shooter from deep but as long as he takes and makes enough of them, it shouldn't matter too much for his role (provided the strong midrange game translates, which I expect). I see some Jaylen Brown in him – but he's way more polished and skilled with the ball entering the league and also has more size.
Boozer is a controversial prospect around here. I can understand that as I myself was not as high on Boozer as the consensus seemed to be. But there just is something about his production that I cannot wave away and that matters (one of the things I've learned over the years if valuing production in young players more). He has a great combination of skills, smarts, and strength that goes a long way to being a successful NBA player. And while he doesn't have particularly great positional size, he's still has all of that in a big body that does not shy away from contact. His vertical athleticism and foot speed is a bit of a concern but we have seen plenty of players with those traits and an advanced understanding of the game overcome it. This is not to say that Boozer will be a star or superstar but it does mean that there's nothing inherently stopping me from drafting him very close to the top. With his passing ability, with the ability to shoot, and with his ability to handle the ball I have no doubts that he'll find ways to contribute on offense – even if he's not an offensive star (though I see a very realistic path to becoming a high-level offensive hub). On defense, I can certainly see him being an overall negative out there and I don't expect much positive impact at least, though I will say that he may be able to do enough to be rock solid on that end with the right line-ups around him. I'm not sure who the best comparison for him is. But I've seen someone say old-man LeBron and I really don't hate that comparison as long as we don't focus on details but the broader strokes.
Wilson has impressed me a lot during this season. Like Dybantsa, he's a special athlete with good size and an attacking mindset – and that's a great foundation for everything else. He is ferocious around the rim and I love that he looks to score at the rim with power whenever he has a chance. What also really elevated him for me is the passing ability relative to his position. When you put as much pressure on the rim as he can and you combine it with the ability to make plays or be useful in sets where you aren't in a position to score, offensive impact really becomes unlocked. So the baseline is already very solid. Add to that the flashes of a finesse game – the midrange jumpers, the occasional dribbling move – and he has a fairly high ceiling, too. At even odds, I would not bet on him becoming an offensive superstar, though, because that would take a steep development curve with respect to his ball handling (which is nice for a PF but currently way too loose/uncoordinated for a perimeter initiator) and/or shooting ability (where he has shown flashes in the midrange, which is important to have, but not much else to believe in him as a genuinely good shooter). As a defender, I consider him solid. I'm probably not as high on him as some of his other fans because I don't think he really exerts his defensive presence on a possession-to-possession basis. This is mostly because I don't think of him that highly as a help defender. He's solid in that regard but nowhere near where he could be with his physical tools, and I don't expect that to change all that much (or else this should already be on display in college). Add to this that he might always lack a bit of strength in match-ups with stronger 4s and Centers and that he can be a bit uncoordinated and clumsy which makes me have doubts about his ability to be a defensive stopper on the perimeter, and I have reason to hope that he'll be a plus defender due to his length, athleticism and motor but I definitely don't expect an elite one. Still, a neutral-to-plus defender who should be an effective offensive player pretty much right off the bat and has room to grow on both ends (and at least a chance to be quite dominant on offense) is an excellent prospect.
Boozer is a controversial prospect around here. I can understand that as I myself was not as high on Boozer as the consensus seemed to be. But there just is something about his production that I cannot wave away and that matters (one of the things I've learned over the years if valuing production in young players more). He has a great combination of skills, smarts, and strength that goes a long way to being a successful NBA player. And while he doesn't have particularly great positional size, he's still has all of that in a big body that does not shy away from contact. His vertical athleticism and foot speed is a bit of a concern but we have seen plenty of players with those traits and an advanced understanding of the game overcome it. This is not to say that Boozer will be a star or superstar but it does mean that there's nothing inherently stopping me from drafting him very close to the top. With his passing ability, with the ability to shoot, and with his ability to handle the ball I have no doubts that he'll find ways to contribute on offense – even if he's not an offensive star (though I see a very realistic path to becoming a high-level offensive hub). On defense, I can certainly see him being an overall negative out there and I don't expect much positive impact at least, though I will say that he may be able to do enough to be rock solid on that end with the right line-ups around him. I'm not sure who the best comparison for him is. But I've seen someone say old-man LeBron and I really don't hate that comparison as long as we don't focus on details but the broader strokes.
Wilson has impressed me a lot during this season. Like Dybantsa, he's a special athlete with good size and an attacking mindset – and that's a great foundation for everything else. He is ferocious around the rim and I love that he looks to score at the rim with power whenever he has a chance. What also really elevated him for me is the passing ability relative to his position. When you put as much pressure on the rim as he can and you combine it with the ability to make plays or be useful in sets where you aren't in a position to score, offensive impact really becomes unlocked. So the baseline is already very solid. Add to that the flashes of a finesse game – the midrange jumpers, the occasional dribbling move – and he has a fairly high ceiling, too. At even odds, I would not bet on him becoming an offensive superstar, though, because that would take a steep development curve with respect to his ball handling (which is nice for a PF but currently way too loose/uncoordinated for a perimeter initiator) and/or shooting ability (where he has shown flashes in the midrange, which is important to have, but not much else to believe in him as a genuinely good shooter). As a defender, I consider him solid. I'm probably not as high on him as some of his other fans because I don't think he really exerts his defensive presence on a possession-to-possession basis. This is mostly because I don't think of him that highly as a help defender. He's solid in that regard but nowhere near where he could be with his physical tools, and I don't expect that to change all that much (or else this should already be on display in college). Add to this that he might always lack a bit of strength in match-ups with stronger 4s and Centers and that he can be a bit uncoordinated and clumsy which makes me have doubts about his ability to be a defensive stopper on the perimeter, and I have reason to hope that he'll be a plus defender due to his length, athleticism and motor but I definitely don't expect an elite one. Still, a neutral-to-plus defender who should be an effective offensive player pretty much right off the bat and has room to grow on both ends (and at least a chance to be quite dominant on offense) is an excellent prospect.
Firmly Lottery
Wagler
Peterson
Burries
Flemings
Acuff
Here's where the draft gets really tricky for me. All of these players are worthy of being drafted in the lottery – I am confident in that. Doesn't necessarily mean that all of them will have a good in the NBA but they are worth the shot. That being said, all of them come with their own set of concerns that make me rank them a comfortably lower than the three players above. It's also incredibly hard for me to predict which of the five players here will live up to their theoretical potential (and I'd expect one or two to really hit) and which won't, making this feel like crapshoot in terms of ranking them among each other.
Spoiler:
What I like about Wagler is his craftiness with the ball, his playmaking instincts (he's not special in that regard but just makes the right pass a lot of the time) and his length. Above all, however, I like his shot profile with high shares of both 3s and FTs at good percentages – that bodes well for his efficiency at the next level. He also has a good motor (and his offensive rebounding is spectacular for a Guard, he's just instinctively always moving to the right spaces to pick up rebounds) and can play solid defense. What concerns me is that he seems to favor a slower playing style where he needs and uses a lot of screens, often without creating or exploiting advantages. That gives me pause for the next level, especially considering that he already played on a team that approximates NBA spacing more than most. His subpar athleticism (both vertical and in terms of first step) and strength means he can struggle to get into the lane and, when he gets there, create good shots or finish at the basket. Those aspects also limit his defense to some extent – especially against the sturdier Guards – though I see him as a neutral and maybe even positive defender at the next level. I expect NBA teams to move him off the ball more because I question whether he can create the consistent advantages required to justify offensive primacy in the NBA. It's positive, though, that I can see him still making an impact in that role; and I do see a path for him to becoming a great on-ball player in the NBA if he pushes his physical development and really works on his in-between game, because he does show flashes of great creation ability and he does have that awesome shot profile. The possibility to become a high-level on-ball creator, when combined with a clear path towards contributing to his team in a more complementary role, still makes him a very interesting prospect.
What I like about Peterson is his shot-making ability and physical tools. His shot-making ability, meaning the ability to convert difficult shots when needed, is among the best in this draft. He projects to be a high-level shooter from both behind the 3pt line and inside of it, and he can leverage it off the ball. That bodes well for his ability to thrive in different settings. He's also a high-level athlete with speed and explosiveness paired with good length. He's fairly lean and has a higher center of gravity than I'd like in an ideal world, but he's still built decently and has wide shoulders that may allow him to become a lot more physical over time. He should be able to make plenty of athletic plays in the NBA and have some noteworthy highlights. I also expect him to be a plus defender if he puts his mind and the necessary effort into it. What concerns me is his lack of discernible offensive impact outside of his own scoring. He presence was often not felt, and he created shockingly little for his teammates. He also did not create as much rim pressure and as many great shots for himself as I'd like (and was prone to settling for jumpers), and it's really his shot-making rather than shot-creation ability that is the story. All that worries me with respect to him becoming a lead Guard. I'm not sure how much of that came down to attitude, and how much to skill or processing limitations (such as handles that didn't look all that crisp to me). Right now, he looks like a high-usage Guard that looks primarily for his own shot and cannot – or does not seek to – consistently leverage his scoring threat to reliably create for others. Those kind of players (thinking of prime Klay Thompson in a very off-ball-centric role, or perhaps a Zach LaVine-type) can be very valuable but they usually aren't superstars. I haven't seen Peterson in HS and can only judge him based on college. So perhaps there's a lot more there and I'll be positively surprised when he turns it up in the NBA, I'd sure hope so. The last question is the elephant in the room: is there an attitude or health problem with him? I'm not sure and can't judge, but the way was in and out of line-ups this season, seemingly frustrating his coach at times, hasn't helped his draft stock and should be closely investigated by teams in that pick range.
What I like about Burries is his all-around game and his built. I love strong Guards that can initiate and take physical contact on both ends, and he seems to be that kind of player. He can also do a little bit of everything on the court – shoot, dribble, pass – and adjust to the situation. I also really like his shot profile with very solid 3PAr and FTr, respectively. It's great to see that he can be a key contributor on an elite team and fill out different roles over the course of a game. From primary creator to someone who spaces the floor, moves the ball, or attacks shifting defenses. That versatility should give him a role in the NBA. He also has been overall solid defensively, though I would not think of that as a strength of his. What concerns me is that Burries looks definitely smaller than 6'4 to me and not particularly long either. If he comes out as essentially PG-sized, that isn't ideal. Because I have concerns about him developing into a lead Guard. I'm not sure he has that level of on-ball shot creation and playmaking in him. So if he's a smaller SG or CG, how valuable is that? Maybe you can be a slightly smaller version of Devin Booker and still offer very good value. But if you don't quite reach that level, the value-drop for this profile is quite steep in today's NBA. There's also a question what level of shooter he is. If he was a surefire 40+% 3pt-shooter on high volume, I'd buy more stock – but as is, that's far from certain. That leaves his range of outcomes quite wide still.
What I like most about Flemings are his speed, control and midrange game. He is fast but under control, and can create and convert midrange shots at a high level. He's also strikes me as a proper PG who can dictate tempo, run an offense and keep mouths fed, which adds a lot to his value. He has decent size, too, and plays with effort. That translates on defense and turns him into a plus defender at the collegiate level (though I expect proper NBA strength to give him some trouble for a while). What concerns me first and foremost is his shot profile and the potential reasons behind it. He is too hesitant to shoot 3s and doesn't get to the line enough to make up for that. It's just difficult to be efficient when you're so reliant on the midrange game to work. It also begs the question whether this is a choice (as he is mostly comfortable with that approach) or due to limitations as a shooter or driver (where his lack of physical strength and perhaps some ball handling limitations come into play). Right now, I project him to be a useful offensive player in the NBA but not a high-level offensive engine. It's possible that he can develop into the latter but if he can't – and to me that's still the more likely scenario – then that lowers his value even though I still expect him to carve out a solid NBA role for himself. A steady PG who doesn't bleed value on defense is still valuable but not exactly a hot commodity. So the team that drafts him has to hope that with NBA spacing and time to adjust his game, he'll be able to consistently leverage his shot and speed to pressure defenses and lead an offense as the primary ball handler. I think someone like Fox would be a nice outcome and decent comparison for him. His path to stardom might indeed look like current Fox (still fast but not as ridiculously fast and with less rim pressure than his peak version) with a more reliable jump shot.
Acuff has a lot of tools on offense to like. He is a good shooter, a good ball handler, a good passer and an excellent game manager for his age. He sets the table for others – in true PG-fashion – while at the same time also being able to get to and score in a variety of different spots on the court. His mental make-up was also impressive, showing no signs of being afraid of the moment – quite the contrary. He also has a strong built that helps him with physical contact on both ends. His shot profile is very encouraging and his efficiency quite good overall. I would not be shocked if Acuff ends up being the best offensive player in the draft. What concerns me with him is his size and defense. Both obviously are connected but still separate. His size can cause him issues as a finisher, and as he does not have elite burst or next-level touch around the rim but rather relies on craftiness as well as strength, that could limit him somewhat moving forward. His size also limits him on defense but I actually think he could be better on that end. But he is a downright awful defender because in addition to the limitations that come from his size (weak contests, cannot switch), he is terrible at keeping his opponents in front of him and offers absolutely nothing as an off-ball or help defender. If he wants an NBA team to build around him, he needs to not only hit on offense (as he did at Arkansas) but also not be one of the worst defenders in the NBA. Both is at least possible, but it tough to take that bet. And if his defense improves but his offense doesn't fully translate, we're probably looking at a bench PG. If the offense does fully translate (and here I'm definitely hopeful) but his defense does not, we're looking at Trae Young as a higher-end outcome – and while Trae had quite a bit of value for a while and was absolutely worth the high pick, ultimately his team never found great success in no small part due to his limitations as the primary building block and decided to move on from him.
What I like about Peterson is his shot-making ability and physical tools. His shot-making ability, meaning the ability to convert difficult shots when needed, is among the best in this draft. He projects to be a high-level shooter from both behind the 3pt line and inside of it, and he can leverage it off the ball. That bodes well for his ability to thrive in different settings. He's also a high-level athlete with speed and explosiveness paired with good length. He's fairly lean and has a higher center of gravity than I'd like in an ideal world, but he's still built decently and has wide shoulders that may allow him to become a lot more physical over time. He should be able to make plenty of athletic plays in the NBA and have some noteworthy highlights. I also expect him to be a plus defender if he puts his mind and the necessary effort into it. What concerns me is his lack of discernible offensive impact outside of his own scoring. He presence was often not felt, and he created shockingly little for his teammates. He also did not create as much rim pressure and as many great shots for himself as I'd like (and was prone to settling for jumpers), and it's really his shot-making rather than shot-creation ability that is the story. All that worries me with respect to him becoming a lead Guard. I'm not sure how much of that came down to attitude, and how much to skill or processing limitations (such as handles that didn't look all that crisp to me). Right now, he looks like a high-usage Guard that looks primarily for his own shot and cannot – or does not seek to – consistently leverage his scoring threat to reliably create for others. Those kind of players (thinking of prime Klay Thompson in a very off-ball-centric role, or perhaps a Zach LaVine-type) can be very valuable but they usually aren't superstars. I haven't seen Peterson in HS and can only judge him based on college. So perhaps there's a lot more there and I'll be positively surprised when he turns it up in the NBA, I'd sure hope so. The last question is the elephant in the room: is there an attitude or health problem with him? I'm not sure and can't judge, but the way was in and out of line-ups this season, seemingly frustrating his coach at times, hasn't helped his draft stock and should be closely investigated by teams in that pick range.
What I like about Burries is his all-around game and his built. I love strong Guards that can initiate and take physical contact on both ends, and he seems to be that kind of player. He can also do a little bit of everything on the court – shoot, dribble, pass – and adjust to the situation. I also really like his shot profile with very solid 3PAr and FTr, respectively. It's great to see that he can be a key contributor on an elite team and fill out different roles over the course of a game. From primary creator to someone who spaces the floor, moves the ball, or attacks shifting defenses. That versatility should give him a role in the NBA. He also has been overall solid defensively, though I would not think of that as a strength of his. What concerns me is that Burries looks definitely smaller than 6'4 to me and not particularly long either. If he comes out as essentially PG-sized, that isn't ideal. Because I have concerns about him developing into a lead Guard. I'm not sure he has that level of on-ball shot creation and playmaking in him. So if he's a smaller SG or CG, how valuable is that? Maybe you can be a slightly smaller version of Devin Booker and still offer very good value. But if you don't quite reach that level, the value-drop for this profile is quite steep in today's NBA. There's also a question what level of shooter he is. If he was a surefire 40+% 3pt-shooter on high volume, I'd buy more stock – but as is, that's far from certain. That leaves his range of outcomes quite wide still.
What I like most about Flemings are his speed, control and midrange game. He is fast but under control, and can create and convert midrange shots at a high level. He's also strikes me as a proper PG who can dictate tempo, run an offense and keep mouths fed, which adds a lot to his value. He has decent size, too, and plays with effort. That translates on defense and turns him into a plus defender at the collegiate level (though I expect proper NBA strength to give him some trouble for a while). What concerns me first and foremost is his shot profile and the potential reasons behind it. He is too hesitant to shoot 3s and doesn't get to the line enough to make up for that. It's just difficult to be efficient when you're so reliant on the midrange game to work. It also begs the question whether this is a choice (as he is mostly comfortable with that approach) or due to limitations as a shooter or driver (where his lack of physical strength and perhaps some ball handling limitations come into play). Right now, I project him to be a useful offensive player in the NBA but not a high-level offensive engine. It's possible that he can develop into the latter but if he can't – and to me that's still the more likely scenario – then that lowers his value even though I still expect him to carve out a solid NBA role for himself. A steady PG who doesn't bleed value on defense is still valuable but not exactly a hot commodity. So the team that drafts him has to hope that with NBA spacing and time to adjust his game, he'll be able to consistently leverage his shot and speed to pressure defenses and lead an offense as the primary ball handler. I think someone like Fox would be a nice outcome and decent comparison for him. His path to stardom might indeed look like current Fox (still fast but not as ridiculously fast and with less rim pressure than his peak version) with a more reliable jump shot.
Acuff has a lot of tools on offense to like. He is a good shooter, a good ball handler, a good passer and an excellent game manager for his age. He sets the table for others – in true PG-fashion – while at the same time also being able to get to and score in a variety of different spots on the court. His mental make-up was also impressive, showing no signs of being afraid of the moment – quite the contrary. He also has a strong built that helps him with physical contact on both ends. His shot profile is very encouraging and his efficiency quite good overall. I would not be shocked if Acuff ends up being the best offensive player in the draft. What concerns me with him is his size and defense. Both obviously are connected but still separate. His size can cause him issues as a finisher, and as he does not have elite burst or next-level touch around the rim but rather relies on craftiness as well as strength, that could limit him somewhat moving forward. His size also limits him on defense but I actually think he could be better on that end. But he is a downright awful defender because in addition to the limitations that come from his size (weak contests, cannot switch), he is terrible at keeping his opponents in front of him and offers absolutely nothing as an off-ball or help defender. If he wants an NBA team to build around him, he needs to not only hit on offense (as he did at Arkansas) but also not be one of the worst defenders in the NBA. Both is at least possible, but it tough to take that bet. And if his defense improves but his offense doesn't fully translate, we're probably looking at a bench PG. If the offense does fully translate (and here I'm definitely hopeful) but his defense does not, we're looking at Trae Young as a higher-end outcome – and while Trae had quite a bit of value for a while and was absolutely worth the high pick, ultimately his team never found great success in no small part due to his limitations as the primary building block and decided to move on from him.
Likely Lottery
Krivas
Peat
Carr
This is now the territory of players who I have a hard time falling out of my personal lottery rankings (fully aware that this most certainly does not reflect the actual lottery rankings of the average NBA team). I would not be surprised if any of them ended up being better pros than some of the players in the category above – but it's hard for me to justify having them in there due to perceived upside.
Spoiler:
I have firmly talked myself into Krivas. He's huge – even by NBA standards – and a presence in the paint of both ends. He can finish at the rim on offense and deter opponents at the rim on defense. Yet he is surprisingly mobile and can reasonably keep up with many perimeter players on drives (at least enough to get in an acceptable contest). He's a good rebounder and has a soft enough touch around the rim that allows him to post up when needed. He has shown flashes as a passer that make me more comfortable having him touch the ball in the post or at the top (though he's certainly nothing special as a passer and his processing speed isn't the highest), and despite not being much of a shooter yet, I am hopeful that he can slowly develop a respectable enough jump shot for when he is left wide open. If he stays healthy, I see an NBA starting Center in him. Zubac would be a good but realistic outcome for him. Hartenstein, Allen, or Brook Lopez (if Krivas manages to be more of a floor spacer), to name a few others – that type and level of player is valued around the NBA and seems attainable to me.
Peat is a tricky case. I loved him for Team USA but I am under no illusions that a 6'8 PF with no 3pt-shot or elite length has natural limitations. Still, I love his physicality and athleticism, which makes him a handful to deal with in the paint even as he has clear limitations as a finisher (lack of length and not a particularly soft touch). That rim pressure is something he can hang his hat on early on. He is also a plus defender and a capable passer, though not special in either respect. His lack of outside shot is the main thing holding him back and I don't think he'll ever be a respected shooter. But he does have a little midrange shot that despite not being super efficient at least gives him an option to score when he can't quite bully his way to the rim. Still, you'd need him to develop the ability to hit open 3s at a non-terrible rate to work out IMO. Aaron Gordon (especially the more current version) is what he can and should strive to become, and that would be well worth a lottery pick.
Carr has a unique combination of athleticism and shooting that makes him intriguing. Very long arms, excellent leaper, and deep range. He moves fairly well off the ball and has a really encouraging and versatile shot profile. He also has the ability to make some plays on the ball in a secondary or – perhaps more likely – tertiary capacity. He lacks strength and that will likely continue to limit him to some extent, and despite having the tools and flashes to be a very good defender, I don't think he consistently impacts possessions on that end to expect him to be more than a fine defender. He has some Mikal Bridges to him (though Carr does not reach that level of defensive prowess and is therefore not quite the prospect Mikal was (who I was as high on as anyone on this board)).
Peat is a tricky case. I loved him for Team USA but I am under no illusions that a 6'8 PF with no 3pt-shot or elite length has natural limitations. Still, I love his physicality and athleticism, which makes him a handful to deal with in the paint even as he has clear limitations as a finisher (lack of length and not a particularly soft touch). That rim pressure is something he can hang his hat on early on. He is also a plus defender and a capable passer, though not special in either respect. His lack of outside shot is the main thing holding him back and I don't think he'll ever be a respected shooter. But he does have a little midrange shot that despite not being super efficient at least gives him an option to score when he can't quite bully his way to the rim. Still, you'd need him to develop the ability to hit open 3s at a non-terrible rate to work out IMO. Aaron Gordon (especially the more current version) is what he can and should strive to become, and that would be well worth a lottery pick.
Carr has a unique combination of athleticism and shooting that makes him intriguing. Very long arms, excellent leaper, and deep range. He moves fairly well off the ball and has a really encouraging and versatile shot profile. He also has the ability to make some plays on the ball in a secondary or – perhaps more likely – tertiary capacity. He lacks strength and that will likely continue to limit him to some extent, and despite having the tools and flashes to be a very good defender, I don't think he consistently impacts possessions on that end to expect him to be more than a fine defender. He has some Mikal Bridges to him (though Carr does not reach that level of defensive prowess and is therefore not quite the prospect Mikal was (who I was as high on as anyone on this board)).
Firmly First Round
Kharchenkov
Steinbach
Ament
Philon
Jefferson
Lendeborg
Yessoufou
Brown
Haugh
Swain
Stirtz
This is now the longer list of players who I currently have firmly in the first round if they declared. Some of them will sneak into my lottery too, but I can't quite put anyone down as likely in the lottery. It's a mix of young players with either solid production or perceived upside yet clear question marks or limitations, as well as older players with seemingly high floors and clear NBA roles but probably limited upside. Those are the kind of players that belong in the first round but not necessarily in the middle of the lottery.
Spoiler:
Kharchenkov is one of the greatest hustle players in college basketball. Very strong and physical with good size that allows him to be a clear positive on defense with match-up versatility as well as draw some fouls on offense. He's also very solid passer. He has rudimentary shooting skills but that will be a big swing factor. It's always an adventure when he drives not least due to his ball handling limitations and lack of wiggle or strategy, which makes him lose control a lot. He's also not much of a vertical athlete and doesn't have good touch around the rim either, so teams can only expect a opportunistic scorer. Still, he does enough on defense, as a passer and in terms of making winning players – puts his body on the line, and gets hands on everything – that I'd want him on my team.
Steinbach is the biggest mystery to me because I have not seen much of him at this point. In the few games I watched, he seemed to struggle to establish himself on offense but the team around him also seemed incapable of feeding him. He strikes me as a very solid all-around player who is strong, has good hands, can shoot a bit, pass a bit (maybe even pass well, there were flashes but it's difficult to fully judge in college for bigs) and finish in the paint. He seems to prefer a more classic style – a lot of fighting for position to post up, seeking to get close to the basket, passing or handing the ball off without dribbling – and that will need to be adjusted a bit in the NBA. Which might very well be possible and even easy for him as I don't know how much his style was a result of circumstances. I'm not sure where to land on his defense yet but I didn't see anything to suggest that he would be a noteworthy defensive presence at least. Measurements could be very important for him also due to positional requirements. He could easily be moved up a category but I need to watch him some more before I can be confident that he will be a starting 5 in the NBA, so this is my cautious placement for the time being.
Ament is all potential right now but he does have good size and – for his size – very good handles. He seems to try on defense though he is limited by his limited athleticism to some extent. That also limits him on offense as a finisher and driver, which in addition to having a still-to-be-developed jumper isn't ideal for his scoring upside. But he still has the size, handles and physicality to draw fouls at a decent rate and I can see him developing a solid jump shot. He also showed me more as a passer and team player as the season went on which made me more hopeful of his future as a role player in the NBA. If he can embrace that, someone with his size and solid all-around skills can carve out a role in the NBA.
I really liked Philon last year – the intensity and poise he displayed impressed me. The intensity has gone down and with it his defense is now firmly in the below average realm, I think. Yet he took a big step forward on offense as the clear leader of his team, a consistent scorer and playmaker, and a reliable shooter. I'm not quite sure how much to stock to buy when it comes to his shot, though. If I thought he was an elite shooter he should have been placed a category higher at least. If he, however, only is a solid shooter who teams have to respect (which is where my mind is right now), that makes him a clear FRP (if his shooting ability is closer to where it was last year, we'd be talking about a SRP – so shooting assessment really means a lot for prospects like him).
Jefferson and Lendeborg are both old draft prospects with big bodies and an all-around skill-set. Them being able to handle the ball and pass at their size is probably their biggest asset. It's easy to see them as potential starters or at least key rotation players in the NBA but I'm also not sure how much development they have left. I assume both could become more reliable shooters and that would go a long way, because without it they are probably not starters. Both, though Jefferson in particular, might also be athletically challenged at times at the next level. I still have them as good bets to carve out NBA roles, however, and that makes them FRPs in my book.
I was not sure where to place Yessoufou. I found myself forgetting about him because I was – and am – not all that intrigued. But of course there's a limit to how far one can push him down and ultimately his name popped back up again for me. He was clearly a productive Freshman. He's strong and seems to have good enough size. This combined with his good motor give him a clear path to an NBA role. I don't trust him much as a decision-maker with the ball in his hands (he strikes me as having a bit of tunnel vision) and he'll need to pick up the shooting (the flashes were there at times) but it's not difficult to imagine an NBA player when you watch him play. He has the physical ingredients and enough to skill to see the vision of a solid NBA player.
Mikel Brown Jr. was another one of those players where I had to think about where to add them again once I became less intrigued. I was excited about him before the season but already saw the flaws. He then really struggled to start the season and played a brand of basketball that was just not conducive to winning at all. Bad shot selection and terrible defense – as he seemed to only care to get the ball back to play offense, no matter if it was from a teammate's rebound or after the opponent scored – were at the forefront of it, but he also struggled to shoot or finish efficiently and did not create nearly as much and as efficiently with his playmaking as he should have to make up for it. He felt very much like Jordan Poole after the championship season rather than a different version of LaMelo Ball that I was hoping for. Still, he obviously has talent and started to become more efficient during conference play (still a fairly small sample, though). He also got to the line a lot which I certainly appreciate and which for the time being sets him apart from some of my comparisons. I'm still not convinced that he can play a winning brand of basketball, or lead a good team, but at some point he's worth drafting to see if and to what result the natural talent he possesses can be harnessed. I hope for a team that holds him accountable because he can be fun to watch.
I like Haugh but became a bit lower on him over time. The shooting question looms large because he needs to be able to shoot at a decent clip to make his all-around game work and worth it. He has good size, is a decent athlete, has a high motor, moves well off the ball and draws fouls. Just a lot to like but little to love. I expect him to be a rotational player in the NBA. Not sure if he can become a starter but coaches should find minutes for him if the shooting threshold is cleared.
Finally, two players with whom I'm less familiar. I have seen very limited footage of Swain and want to look at him more closely. But the profile looks like a clear FRP – production, size, the way he moves on the court – and I wanted to include him here. We'll see where I land on him later. Similarly, I have not seen that much of Stirtz. But once again I really like his overall statistical profile and the way he can shoot and make plays for others while seemingly clearing thresholds in terms of size and athleticism (based on the footage I have watched) gives me confidence that he will be an NBA player and should be drafted in the first round. How high remains to be seen, but color me intrigued.
Steinbach is the biggest mystery to me because I have not seen much of him at this point. In the few games I watched, he seemed to struggle to establish himself on offense but the team around him also seemed incapable of feeding him. He strikes me as a very solid all-around player who is strong, has good hands, can shoot a bit, pass a bit (maybe even pass well, there were flashes but it's difficult to fully judge in college for bigs) and finish in the paint. He seems to prefer a more classic style – a lot of fighting for position to post up, seeking to get close to the basket, passing or handing the ball off without dribbling – and that will need to be adjusted a bit in the NBA. Which might very well be possible and even easy for him as I don't know how much his style was a result of circumstances. I'm not sure where to land on his defense yet but I didn't see anything to suggest that he would be a noteworthy defensive presence at least. Measurements could be very important for him also due to positional requirements. He could easily be moved up a category but I need to watch him some more before I can be confident that he will be a starting 5 in the NBA, so this is my cautious placement for the time being.
Ament is all potential right now but he does have good size and – for his size – very good handles. He seems to try on defense though he is limited by his limited athleticism to some extent. That also limits him on offense as a finisher and driver, which in addition to having a still-to-be-developed jumper isn't ideal for his scoring upside. But he still has the size, handles and physicality to draw fouls at a decent rate and I can see him developing a solid jump shot. He also showed me more as a passer and team player as the season went on which made me more hopeful of his future as a role player in the NBA. If he can embrace that, someone with his size and solid all-around skills can carve out a role in the NBA.
I really liked Philon last year – the intensity and poise he displayed impressed me. The intensity has gone down and with it his defense is now firmly in the below average realm, I think. Yet he took a big step forward on offense as the clear leader of his team, a consistent scorer and playmaker, and a reliable shooter. I'm not quite sure how much to stock to buy when it comes to his shot, though. If I thought he was an elite shooter he should have been placed a category higher at least. If he, however, only is a solid shooter who teams have to respect (which is where my mind is right now), that makes him a clear FRP (if his shooting ability is closer to where it was last year, we'd be talking about a SRP – so shooting assessment really means a lot for prospects like him).
Jefferson and Lendeborg are both old draft prospects with big bodies and an all-around skill-set. Them being able to handle the ball and pass at their size is probably their biggest asset. It's easy to see them as potential starters or at least key rotation players in the NBA but I'm also not sure how much development they have left. I assume both could become more reliable shooters and that would go a long way, because without it they are probably not starters. Both, though Jefferson in particular, might also be athletically challenged at times at the next level. I still have them as good bets to carve out NBA roles, however, and that makes them FRPs in my book.
I was not sure where to place Yessoufou. I found myself forgetting about him because I was – and am – not all that intrigued. But of course there's a limit to how far one can push him down and ultimately his name popped back up again for me. He was clearly a productive Freshman. He's strong and seems to have good enough size. This combined with his good motor give him a clear path to an NBA role. I don't trust him much as a decision-maker with the ball in his hands (he strikes me as having a bit of tunnel vision) and he'll need to pick up the shooting (the flashes were there at times) but it's not difficult to imagine an NBA player when you watch him play. He has the physical ingredients and enough to skill to see the vision of a solid NBA player.
Mikel Brown Jr. was another one of those players where I had to think about where to add them again once I became less intrigued. I was excited about him before the season but already saw the flaws. He then really struggled to start the season and played a brand of basketball that was just not conducive to winning at all. Bad shot selection and terrible defense – as he seemed to only care to get the ball back to play offense, no matter if it was from a teammate's rebound or after the opponent scored – were at the forefront of it, but he also struggled to shoot or finish efficiently and did not create nearly as much and as efficiently with his playmaking as he should have to make up for it. He felt very much like Jordan Poole after the championship season rather than a different version of LaMelo Ball that I was hoping for. Still, he obviously has talent and started to become more efficient during conference play (still a fairly small sample, though). He also got to the line a lot which I certainly appreciate and which for the time being sets him apart from some of my comparisons. I'm still not convinced that he can play a winning brand of basketball, or lead a good team, but at some point he's worth drafting to see if and to what result the natural talent he possesses can be harnessed. I hope for a team that holds him accountable because he can be fun to watch.
I like Haugh but became a bit lower on him over time. The shooting question looms large because he needs to be able to shoot at a decent clip to make his all-around game work and worth it. He has good size, is a decent athlete, has a high motor, moves well off the ball and draws fouls. Just a lot to like but little to love. I expect him to be a rotational player in the NBA. Not sure if he can become a starter but coaches should find minutes for him if the shooting threshold is cleared.
Finally, two players with whom I'm less familiar. I have seen very limited footage of Swain and want to look at him more closely. But the profile looks like a clear FRP – production, size, the way he moves on the court – and I wanted to include him here. We'll see where I land on him later. Similarly, I have not seen that much of Stirtz. But once again I really like his overall statistical profile and the way he can shoot and make plays for others while seemingly clearing thresholds in terms of size and athleticism (based on the footage I have watched) gives me confidence that he will be an NBA player and should be drafted in the first round. How high remains to be seen, but color me intrigued.
Potentially First Round
Players that I have thought about as potential FRPs. I have good enough grasps on some of them to know that I have them as fringe FRPs (late first, early second round), but there are also quite a few of which I haven't seen enough. So this is just a tentative list in alphabetical order without an explanation. Please feel free to add if I'm missing someone.
Condon
Evans
Johnson, M.
Mirkovic
Momcilovic
Mullins
Ngongba
Quaintance
Richmond
Sarr
Sandford
Sharp
Tanner
Thomas, M.
Veesaar
Note: This list doesn't include any international players because I have yet to watch any of them.
