wco81 wrote:Can you post his top 20? Not copy and paste the whole article but it's behind a paywall.
Righto. Do I get in trouble for copying and pasting entire articles?... I've edited most out and left in some that are relevant to the Warriors IMHO.
1. Cade Cunningham, SG/SF, Oklahoma State, Freshman
2. Evan Mobley, PF/C, USC, Freshman
3. Scottie Barnes, SF, Florida State, Freshman
I’m really surprised Barnes isn’t getting more buzz. He could easily end up as the best player in this draft and has a case for being the top pick.
Again, the search for big wings comes first at the NBA level, and everything comes later — and the playoffs are showing why. Barnes has weaknesses, and we’ll get to them in a minute, but there is early Spurs-era Kawhi Leonard upside here as well.
For starters, for a player who is supposed to be terrible at offense, Barnes’s offensive numbers are pretty darned good. He came off the bench for a relatively slow-paced team and that muted his counting stats, but Barnes averaged 23.8 points per 100 possessions — similar to the rate of most other first-round hopefuls — and shot 56.1 percent inside the arc. Both numbers increased in ACC play when the Seminoles played their most difficult competition.
Barnes showed an ability to get all the way to the cup under his own steam, something he should be able to do much more in the open floor that the NBA offers. Even against defenders that lay off him, Barnes chews up space with huge strides and, at 6-foot-9, can finish over any guard, which allowed him to generate rim attempts despite lacking explosiveness.
Despite his huge size, Barnes loves to play defense and often checked opposing point guards. I don’t mean switches, either; this was his primary assignment. With his long arms and relentless motor, he frequently picked the dribble of ballhandlers on the perimeter. He offers the kind of switchable “checkmate” defensive answer that every team craves, possessing the size to check interior players but also the quickness and hands to switch onto any perimeter threat. All the background on him is fantastic, too.
Barnes has warts, particularly in his shooting and his lack of off-the-dribble turbo gear, and that could put a cap on his offensive upside. He doesn’t rebound well for his size and was outplayed by Michigan’s Franz Wagner (see below) in an NCAA tournament game. His downside looms if the shooting doesn’t make him playable at the end of games.
That said, I remain amazed he isn’t getting more buzz. For comparison, Patrick Williams came off the bench for Florida State a year earlier and ended up as the fourth pick in the draft, and Barnes’ tools and production dwarf Williams’. As the draft’s No. 2 on-the-ball prospect, he compares favorably to Cunningham on defense and distribution but pales next to him as a shooter.
As ever, shooting is the swing skill, and it’s why I rate Cunningham higher. Barnes’ floor is just much lower because of the shooting question. Nonetheless, I happen to think Barnes is so skilled in other respects that he’s still a useful player even if he doesn’t shoot — think a jumbo, rim-threatening version of Bruce Brown. And if he shoots even halfway decently, he has a pretty good runway to being an NBA All-Star.
4. Alperen Sengun, PF/C, Besiktas
As I noted a few months ago, Sengun is the pearl of a strong international class, and he is still flying somewhat under the radar despite winning the MVP of the Turkish League. That league is probably the second-best in Europe right now after Spain’s, and the history says that when a teenager — Sengun turns 19 in July — crushes a good overseas league like that, the fail rate is basically nil.
There are legitimate concerns about Sengun defensively, that he might be the type of guy who gets run off the floor in a playoff series. Overall, I would profile him as similar to Kevin Love — more of a “4.5” than a true five and somebody whose offense will need to make up for non-elite rim protection and mobility. Nonetheless, his offensive skill set is crazy good for a player his age. He has ball skills, passing ability, a good shooting stroke that projects to 3-point range and a dizzying array of spins, pivots and finishes on the low block.
I’ll be surprised if he isn’t able to rack up double-doubles relatively early in his career; it’s the defensive question in the modern game that keeps him out of my top three, and even then I still wonder if I have him too low. A lot of not-very-athletic bigs with average tools but advanced feel have ended up being far better defenders than initially projected — Marc Gasol obviously comes to mind for me — and Sengun could be another example. I wouldn’t just write him off at this end of the floor.
5. Jalen Green, SG, G League Ignite
6. Jalen Suggs, PG, Gonzaga, Freshman
7. Franz Wagner, SF, Michigan, Sophomore
The younger brother of Orlando center Moritz Wagner, Franz is a very different kind of player: He’s a huge wing with unusually nimble feet for his size, capable of checking guards on the perimeter and busting out in passing lanes for steals. Wagner stands 6-foot-9 but had one of the better steal rates in this draft class; he’s the classic switchable defender teams covet.
Offensively, he projects more as a role player than a star. Wagner can shoot but has a low release point on his shot and hasn’t shown the footwork or off-the-dribble sizzle to be a high-frequency bomber. He’s good in transition and can attack in straight lines in the half court, where his size and stride length give him an advantage even on basic dribble moves. He’s also a good passer with a strong feel for the game, and he rarely screws up, resulting in a better than 2:1 assist-to-turnover rate.
The other thing Wagner has going for him is his age. Although listed as a sophomore, he is actually younger than several of the freshman in this draft class, including Barnes, Mobley and Suggs. He doesn’t scream outrageous upside, but the youth, production and positional scarcity all point to Wagner as an underrated player in this draft.
8. Jonathan Kuminga, SF, G League Ignite
9. Jalen Johnson, PF, Duke, Freshman
There are all kinds of questions about Johnson right now, and teams are digging in and doing their homework about how much is genuinely concerning. There are also some basketball concerns; he is not a great shooter, and as a driver and finisher, he was much more effective operating in transition than in the half court.
But there is a pretty sharp talent cliff at this point in the draft, and Johnson comes just before the ledge. Whatever the other concerns, it’s inarguable he’s shown the talent to be a starting power forward in the NBA. Watching him reminds me a bit of a player in Memphis, James Johnson; like his namesake, this Johnson can play as a big while operating as an on-ball creator on offense, but he can also be plagued by wildness and inconsistent shooting.
Johnson put up video-game stats in his limited time at Duke — 30.4 points, 16.4 rebounds and 6.0 assists per 100 possessions, with a 25.1 PER. He had 3.1 steals and 3.3 blocks per 100, with the steal rate, in particular, being pretty insane for a 6-foot-9 power forward. He also made plenty of mistakes, possessing the highest turnover rate of any prospect in this draft. My research, though, indicates that otherwise productive prospects with insane turnover rates aren’t notably worse off in the pros.
The eye test is maybe not quite as bullish. Offensively, he has a pretty good first step and ball skills for his size. However, he struggles to adjust the plan when his initial path is cut off. Defensively, he can be a major disruptor as a secondary defender off the ball, but he can be a bit upright and tight-hipped on it.
I get the overall concerns, and I don’t want to minimize them. But there is massively more upside here than with any other player remaining on the board. Yes, it feels high for a risk-reward pick like this, except the middle of this draft isn’t strong. The ninth overall pick also bombs a lot more often than people realize (we recently had Dennis Smith Jr. and Kevin Knox go ninth in consecutive years, for instance), so this is where the equation on Johnson starts turning favorable. It’s possible he bombs, but this is as low as I can put him.
10. Josh Giddey, SF, Adelaide
11. Jared Butler, PG/SG, Baylor, Junior
12. Corey Kispert, SF, Gonzaga, Senior
13. James Bouknight, SG, Connecticut, Sophomore
14. Moses Moody, SG, Arkansas, Freshman
Watching Moody’s tape, the two things that immediately strike you are that 1) he has a really good chance of carving out a career as a plus 3-and-D guy, and 2) he has fairly little chance of popping as anything more than that.
Moody has good size and length at 6-foot-6 with a 6-foot-11 wingspan and a smooth outside shot. His 3-point rate wasn’t off the charts, however, as he didn’t show the kind of ability to run off screens and fire on the move that you’d want to see from a high-level gunner. He also rarely gets to the basket and doesn’t wow you with athleticism.
Where he did show well is on the defensive end. While he wasn’t disruptive off the ball, he gets in a stance, slides his feet and uses his length to distract shooters. He’s also young even for a freshman, and has some instincts as a scorer, so there’s a chance some untapped upside remains.
He shapes up as a high-floor, low-ceiling type in spite of his youth, one who makes for a good pick around this point in the draft.
15. Usman Garuba, PF/C, Real Madrid
16. Davion Mitchell, PG, Baylor, Senior
Everyone has a visceral reaction to ball-pressure guys, and Mitchell was probably the best in college basketball. His lateral quickness is insane; nobody could get by him off the dribble. Mitchell combines that with a bulldog mentality and a zest for taking charges. He’ll be a Patrick Beverley or Avery Bradley type checking other point guards, a real pain in the ass to play against.
Mitchell was also one of the country’s most improved players at the offensive end. He shot 44.7 percent from 3-point range last season and showed real growth as an on-ball distributor, although Mitchell and Butler (above) alternated responsibilities in the backcourt. Mitchell also has a tremendous blow-by gear to the rim and shot a stellar 56.5 percent inside the arc.
That said, there are concerns here. Mitchell has a good frame, but he’s going to look small in the NBA; I question his listed height of 6-foot-2, although we’ll find out more at this week’s Combine. One other notable red flag is that his rebound rate was embarrassing. He only grabbed 3.9 boards per 100 possessions in Big 12 play, the worst rate of any quasi-significant prospect in this draft.
Offensively, his 3-point shooting from last season may be an outlier; he still only hit 64.1 percent from the line, and finished his career at 65.7 percent. Even comparing usage rates this year, Butler had far more of the offense on his shoulders than Mitchell. To add, Mitchell also virtually never draws fouls. He’s also one of the older players in this draft, turning 22 in September.
In an offense-first league, I still have a hard time seeing starter upside in Mitchell at that end. His defense will surely keep him on the court, and his work ethic and intangibles will push him up draft boards as well, but today’s NBA is a tough place for ball-pressure guys to shine.
17. Miles McBride, PG, West Virginia, Sophomore
18. Keon Johnson, SG, Tennessee, Freshman
19. Chris Duarte, SG/SF, Oregon, Senior
20. Jaden Springer, PG/SG, Tennessee, Freshman
