Man is condemned to be free. Last night, I attempted to look for a rice cooker on Amazon. I stared in liquid fear as the phrase 1-16 of 793 results for "rice cooker" stared back at me. I scrolled through choice after suitable choice, page after similar page, midnight after wasted summer evening. The wrong choice was inevitable. I laughed humorlessly, and only the algorithm heard. And my wife. She poked her head in to check on her other drooping half. “Shoot the analyst and make a decision,” she chided. I chose the wrong wife.
I will also undoubtedly choose the wrong players here. Fortunately, I’m not actually choosing anyone. At least not in any realm more tangible than pure thought exercise. (Although, I will add that I somehow performed very well on last year’s board.)
1. Victor Wembanyama
The Spurs, mercifully, are not free. They were not free before the lottery balls were drawn. They were not free after the lottery balls were drawn. They were spared from the agony of choice by the alignment of the lottery gods with the rising Victor Wembanyama.
Vic’s extraterrestrial status has been stated and restated. His floor is something like Monstar Jaren Jackson Jr. I am interested to see what exactly his offensive role becomes a few years down the line. GOAT-level rim running and lob smashing are a given. What level does his shooting reach? How does his playmaking and passing out of doubles develop? With added strength and incremental handling improvements, can he self-generate heaps of dunks and free throws?
2. Scoot Henderson
I like Scoot enough to put him at 2, and also less than most people who put him at 2. He’s the most well-rounded point guard prospect in some time. However, I do think Scoot’s athleticism has been somewhat mischaracterized. To my eyes, his explosiveness is a clear level below Ja and young Rose. Personally, I see Scoot’s athleticism and overall physical profile as almost like the twitchy point guard cousin of Kawhi. Huge hands, long arms, cartoonishly jacked, and this singular athletic trait I can only call traction — an ability to hold one’s line on drives as if wearing cleats.
Also, there seems to be an idea that Scoot’s shooting numbers are more encouraging because his 3-point shooting “improved” so much from year one to year two in the G-League. I think there’s a slight lack of awareness in the draft community of just how statistically insignificant these ~50-shot samples are (please refer to the footnote).1 I realize that’s often all there is to go off of, but that’s why you have to incorporate as many shooting indicators as possible to grow the sample — multi-year 3-point shooting, free throws, midrange percentage, etc.
Considering this, Scoot’s 3-point percentage of 22% on 51 threes in year one vs 32% on 68 threes in year two is not as strong of evidence of shooting improvement as one might think. The fact that Scoot actually shot slightly worse from both the line and midrange in year two, along with the fact that his mechanics were nearly identical in both years, should only further the skepticism that any significant shooting improvement has occurred.
That being said, I still think Scoot will probably be a solid shooter in time. Mid-70s from the line and 40% from midrange over the past two seasons, together with pretty good form, is certainly a better baseline to work with than most teenage athletic guard prospects.
I do love how responsive Scoot’s handle is. The overall playmaking is very good, although I’d like to see him pressure the rim more consistently. The physicality and anticipation suggest he can be at least neutral as a defender in time, and possibly a level or two above that.
3. Amen Thompson
The shot is, um, dispiriting, but almost everything else about this kid screams superstar potential. He’s a puma with a seven-foot wingspan and the floatiness of a helium balloon. And if he’s not the best passer in the class, he’s certainly the most inventive. It also seems like everyone in his vicinity swears by him as a high-character guy (same with Ausar).
Sometimes I wonder if Amen should be viewed through a similar lens to (healthy) Zion. Sounds weird, but let me explain: the non-shooting non-center is an archetype that typically comes with steep limitations. But Zion has such extreme athletic strengths that it overrides those limitations. Amen might be in the same camp. Both are walking paint touches with dizzying athleticism. Zion combines this with unmatched power and finishing ability. Amen combines it with mesmerizing playmaking creativity and agility. The overall undeniability might be similar.
If the shot wasn’t so busted I’d put him number two. I just have far more confidence in Scoot developing the jumper as a valuable counter which unlocks his playmaking and driving, especially against playoff defenses. But Amen’s ceiling is second only to Vic.
4. Brandon Miller
Big wing with elite shooting, good playmaking feel, and solid defense. The foundation for Miller as a high-level starter in a league starved for versatile wings is straightforward. Yet Miller’s age, paint struggles, and lack of downhill burst indicate a ceiling which falls short of superstardom. His 90th percentile outcome is much more Khris Middleton than Paul George. For that, he falls here, beneath the three players in the class I deem to have the greatest superstar equity.
5. Ausar Thompson
It can be a bit hard to visualize how exactly Ausar is fully actualized in an NBA offense, especially at the playoff level. He’s more of a secondary creator than Amen, and the shot is only moderately further along. But I like his improvements so far, and I think the mechanics are workable. Ausar has also been a decent free-throw shooter over the past couple years, hovering around 70%. Considering also his willingness to take spot-up 3s, and the fact that he’s hit those in the low 30s percent, I think there’s reason to believe that Ausar can reach a respectable level of catch-and-shoot efficiency from 3, somewhere in the mid-30s percent.
Ausar sometimes gets compared to Andre Iguodala. Perhaps that’s how Ausar fit is maximized. I feel like people sleep on Iggy’s Hall of Fame-level impact. I would take an Iguodala clone top 5, maybe even top 3, in any draft. Projecting any player to match Iggy’s mastery of cerebral, connective basketball is lofty indeed. Nonetheless, the similarities between the two certainly exist. This intersection of athleticism + length + feel is rare, and brings outsized returns deep in the playoffs.
I’ll bet on Ausar’s scalability and intelligence, and even wager that his sole weakness – shooting – becomes increasingly benign over the next few years. 25-year-old Ausar Thompson could very well be the two-way star wing that teams froth over.
6. Taylor Hendricks
As we quickly find ourselves past the superstar-hunting portion of the draft, I’ll go with the player who projects as the cleanest fit as a high-impact complementary player on a good team. Arguably the most switchable defender in the class, Hendricks pairs wing athleticism with the physical dimensions of a four. The amount of impact plays he makes as a roamer on the weakside, together with his advanced technique and avoidance of undisciplined fouls and block chasing, has me salivating at the thought of his translation to playoff defense.
The offensive game is blissfully plug-and-play. His shot versatility and high release point portend upside as a true three-point bomber. Relatedly, the ball just goes in – one make under 40% from 3 and 78% from the line is impressive stuff for a 19-year-old athletic forward prospect. The ability to sky for lobs and fly in transition further hints at a future role as a hyper-efficient secondary offensive option. For someone who generally isn’t considered to have the highest of “upsides,” I think Hendricks’ defensive versatility and offensive efficiency is exactly the type of package that propels teams from good to great.
7. Kobe Bufkin
While I’m lower on several of the score-first combo guards in this draft, I think Bufkin is the exception. It’s rare for a 19-year-old guard prospect to not only have no weaknesses, but to possess at least a mild strength in every major facet of the game.
“The next Jalen Williams” has already become a cliché, and Bufkin is not that. But I do think there’s one similarity: despite his performance rightfully shooting him up boards, anchoring bias still prevents most from going all-in on Bufkin. If Nick Smith Jr. had the exact season that Bufkin just had, how high would he be? Top five? Top three??
Bufkin’s finishing, shooting ability, feel, and catch-and-go decisiveness indicate a guard who will thrive playing off any of the NBA’s mega-creators. His pesky defense means he comes without the typical defensive limitations that plague many of his ilk (Simons, Herro, Poole). Many have expressed some concern that he doesn’t quite have the pop to be a high-volume creator. How many guys still remaining would you really want soaking up 30% usage in a primary creator role? I don’t see any where that leads to a high level of winning. Scalability is something I evidently prioritize more than most. I won’t stray from that ethos here.
8. Cason Wallace
Another super-scalable, well-rounded combo guard, I’d be tempted to put Wallace a bit higher if not for some concerns about the health of his back. Team doctors won’t return my calls, so I can't knock him too much. Also, the statistical projections love this man.
As with Scoot, I think some of the concerns about Cason being “small” can just be chalked up to a habitual over-indexing on height. Basketball is played with your hands, not the crown of your head, after all. Wallace has a 6’9 wingspan and an 8’5 standing reach. That’s the same standing reach as the big and foreboding Gradey Dick, by the way. It’s also slightly bigger than Jrue Holiday, and I don’t hear anyone bemoaning Jrue’s lack of a 6’6 frame.
Considering his length and strong physique, I think Wallace will be switchable 1-3 without issue. His instincts and activity away from the ball are superb, and the steal rate of 3.7 checks out. His defensive impact will be very strong, and there’s All-Defense upside here.
Wallace’s offense also seems underrated. Yes, he might not have the wiggle and separation ability to be a super-high-volume creator. Yet unless a player is a superstar shot creator, I care more about scalability. And Cason has a lot of that. I think he’ll be at minimum above-average as a spot-up shooter. He’s also surprisingly explosive in straight lines to the rim, and finished there at an excellent percentage. Most importantly, while his playmaking isn’t flashy, it’s undeniably effective – 25% assist percentage and 2.0 AST/TO is highly impressive, especially for a freshman who wasn’t fed a ton of lead guard reps. He just makes impactful plays in the flow of the offense.
Nothing Cason does makes for great highlights. His bag consists of straight-line drives, low-risk passes, and winning plays. But the outlines of an efficient, versatile starter who fits seamlessly into the ecosystem of a contending-level team are apparent if one prods a bit deeper.
9. Jarace Walker
The defense is obviously great. He’s truly frightening as a roamer, and offers good swithability 3-5. I’m not sure either the rim protection or lateral agility on the perimeter are quite good enough to indicate DPOY upside, but I’m comfortable with Walker as a potential All-Defense guy in his higher-end outcomes. The versatility and lack of weaknesses should also translate very well to a playoff setting.
I’m a bit worried about Jarace’s offensive fit. He flashed high-level connective passing (including a few mind-bending touch passes), which is something I value highly. The scoring is a concern, though, inside and out. The shot is wonky, and he didn’t use his strength nearly enough getting to the rim, instead settling for awkward floaters that rarely went in.
This will be the only invocation of Draymond Green’s name I’ll make: like Draymond, I believe Walker’s offense can be unlocked if he’s at the five, where he can make plays on the short roll with a spaced floor, and where his shaky shooting is less of an issue. Walker will likely be able to cameo enough as a small-ball five for this to be a major source of value. Yes, he’s only 6’7, but he’s got a 7’3 wingspan and a huge frame that’s very similar to Draymond (sorry I lied), only jacked. Otherwise, pairing him with a stretch big could do wonders. He’s occasionally mocked to Indiana at 7, and the fit with Myles Turner is dreamy.
10. Anthony Black
Black contains a certain tension between fit and feel. Like Ausar, I’m unsure if he has the jumper and overall scoring punch to unlock his playmaking. How does he counter unders or switches at the next level? Yet if he’s in more of an off-ball role, does he have enough gravity as a spot-up shooter to provide some semblance of spacing?
But damn it, the guy just knows how to play. There’s palpable Alex Caruso energy pulsing through Black’s game. His mixture of motor, feel, and size results in impact plays all over the court – relentless ball pressure, vertical contests at the rim, Ginobili-esque extra passes, apparitions in passing lanes for steals. His game glows with the nimbus of a plus-minus god. Indeed, Arkansas was 12.7 points per 100 better with him on the court than off this season, per hoop-explorer.com.
Lastly, a word on the initial questions: despite the lack of a pull-up and Arkansas’ medieval spacing, Black was still very effective getting downhill, especially in the PnR. He got to the rim frequently, shot a solid 63% once there, and posted a monster free throw rate. His jumper is weird, and kinda bad. But like a lot of these fellas (Ausar, Jarace, Bilal), there’s enough to work with that he has a good chance at becoming at least respectable as a spot-up guy.
11. Cam Whitmore
Here we have a titanic faceoff between feel and athleticism. Whitmore’s tunnel vision and overall subpar feel relative to other players in this range scare me. The spectacular athletic pop and shockingly good statistical projections provide some counterbalance.
I still don’t quite see the superstar upside that some others do. For me, playmaking feel is mostly innate. Rehearsed reads in certain ordered situations – e.g. reading the low man as a PnR ball handler – can be learned with repetition, leading to incremental improvements in playmaking within these structured settings. But each possession is a snowflake, with unexpected bits of randomness scattered about – the big hedging half a step higher than anticipated, the screen making slightly less contact than in practice, the pass to the corner shooter obscured by a stray hand waving at the end of Mikal Bridges’ eight-foot arm. Rote learning often struggles to generalize to these chaotic environments. This is where creative problem solving, the substrate of feel, sings.
This is where I have doubts about Whitmore’s ability to solve the complex problems posed to a primary creator on an every-possession basis. His passing numbers (6% assist rate, 0.5 AST/TO ratio) lag far behind even Andrew Wiggins as a prospect; we’ve seen that Wiggins’ ideal role is more of a number three offensive option, with limited decision-making responsibility. That’s not a comp, by the way – it's a word of caution in projecting offensive stardom onto hyper-athletic wings with little-to-no playmaking feel. And I’m not really buying all the excuses based around Villanova’s offensive environment.
With that in mind, I see Whitmore’s ideal offensive role as more of a highly efficient second or third option who lives at the rim and at the line. If he learns to attack immediately off the catch and tear apart a shifted defense at the seams, this is a possibility. That’s going to take a lot of learning, but Whitmore is young with a highly plastic brain. Whitmore did showcase a knack for timely cuts that might reveal some latent feel for a more dynamic style of basketball.
I’m also a bit less convinced of the viability of Whitmore’s jumper than some. Yes, I know. He shot 40% on catch-and-shoot 3s. On 45 attempts. As discussed in the Scoot section, samples of this size contain much less information than one might hope. By broadening the shooting sample, Cam looks like a decent shooter for an 18-year-old athletic forward prospect, but far from a lock to be an effective shooter at the NBA level. Cam’s full body of work at Villanova includes 34% from 3 (108 attempts) and 70% from the line (64 attempts). This is still not hugely informative, both because the sample is still somewhat small and the percentages are kinda mid, but not bad. The jumper looks a little slow and arm-heavy for my liking. Yet he’s young enough for high-level shooting outcomes to still be possible.
Despite my reservations, Whitmore’s ferocious slashing, defensive tools, and extreme youth entice. He can only drop so far.
12. Bilal Coulibaly
This lad just swoops around the court like an Andean condor, with the wingspan to match. His standing reach is a half-inch higher than Leonard Miller’s, which is a wild little fun fact. He also dwarfs Whitmore. And he is just a lad, yet to turn 19. It must be noted how impressive it is that he contributed as a starter to a pro team in the French League championship, capping an insane 18-month developmental eruption into lottery status. He’s still growing into his body. All indications suggest he’s very, very early in his developmental trajectory.
I feel like it can’t be overstated: you just don’t see 18-year-old wings this huge and this athletic producing at a solid level for good professional teams. He’s already a fearsome multipositional defender on the perimeter with a high steal rate. His efficiency and finishing effectiveness have benefited Mets 92 as well, at 60% true shooting and 61% from 2. The usage, at 14%, is small, but not microscopic.
Also, the shooting is... not bad?? 34% from 3 (119 attempts) and 71% from the line (173 attempts) across both levels this year is actually rather encouraging for a player this raw. The mechanics aren’t exactly beautiful, but also certainly not broken. I think it’s more likely than not he reaches at least decency as a spot-up shooter.
Personally, I think you just have to bet on the tools here. I’m not sure what his 90th percentile outcome looks like; I do know the notion is titillating. And unlike many mystery boxes, I think even Coulibaly’s more likely outcomes are highly valuable. “Huge wing with great defensive versatility, passable shooting, and dominant slashing” seems entirely realistic.
13. Dereck Lively
Lively’s foundation as a dunk & drop center, with favorable odds to become elite at both, is enough to make him comfortably a first-round prospect. The catch radius on lobs encompasses half the solar system, the rebounding is very good, and he even possesses good mobility for a big, hinting at potential scheme versatility. It’s a fool’s errand to project any drop big as Gobert-level defensively, but even the next tier of Brook Lopezes and Mitchell Robinsons provide great value.
Lively’s passing vision and shooting upside separate him from typical prospects of his ilk. He processes the floor with a rapidity that is stunning at times, even in situations like offensive rebounds where passing is rarely the first instinct. The evidence of 3-point shooting potential is less apparent from his college sample, but he was a passable perimeter shooter in high school and has fairly decent form.
While the motor and aggression level sputter at times, it’s easy enough to envision Lively as an above-average starter that he belongs here.
14. Gradey Dick
Dick is the first pure shooter to appear on the board. The shot is gorgeous and lethal, but I do hope he can up the volume once in an NBA system – 10 3FGA per 100 isn’t quite as high as you’d hope.
Gradey has just enough extras to separate him from other shooting specialists in the class. His size, cutting, connective passing, rim finishing, off-ball defensive activity, and overall feel are all sufficient to expect more solid starter than fringe starter outcomes. Basically, I think there’s more Bojan Bogdanovic than Georges Niang here. I also love Gradey’s precocious understanding of point-five basektball. Defensively, NBA wings will definitely try to expose Dick. His ability to hold up on an island will be a swing factor for his career.
15. Sidy Cissoko
The case for Cissoko this high lies in his penchant for making plays on both ends. His connective playmaking is excellent for a wing, let alone one playing in a pro league at 18. Defensively, his rates of steals and blocks jump off the page, and the switchabilty is a precious gem in today’s NBA. He’s simply all over the place, making impact plays.
Considering his youth, size, versatility, feel, and motor, this doesn’t feel high. My main concern is the shooting, because obviously. Yet the form, while a little low and a little pushy, is fairly fluid, and the percentages suggest he’s not all that far away from mid-30s percent decency from 3.
He doesn’t have the burst or touch to be a high-usage creator, but again, I care less about that than most. 18-year-old two-way wings who are productive in pro leagues are evidently kinda underrated. In light of the NBA’s obsession with exactly that player type, this is a little wild.
16. Leonard Miller
Miller had played essentially zero high-level basketball before this past season, heralding from something called the Ontario Scholastic League. Then he just kinda fucked around in the G League and put up a 20 PER.
The formidable physical tools and latent feel inform the bet here. He’s somewhat of a 4/5 tweener and his mid-career role is anyone’s guess, but where there’s flashes there’s (maybe) a gem. And the flashes are myriad: uncanny touch inside the arc (59% from 2), open-court ballhandling, instinctive cutting, nascent playmaking (2.5 APG vs 1.5 TOPG over final 15 games), hints of shooting upside (79% FT on 77 attempts), high-revving defensive activity and motor, promising switchability vs wings and bigs.
There are kinks to work out, to put it mildly. His defensive technique is a mess, especially scrambling on the perimeter, and he’s often just running around stochastically without any clear intent. The rim protection is also not nearly sufficient right now for him to play extended minutes at the five. The shot is also a question mark, and his decision making often short-circuits.
But the potential and pro-league production are a clear level above anyone left on the board. He’s the pick here.
17. Rayan Rupert
Rayan Rupert possesses a set of traits so well suited for the modern wing that it’s downright eerie. He’s got hooper DNA; his dad and sister are accomplished pros. He’s 6’6 with a 7’2 wingspan and the standing reach to match many a center. He moves with the lightness of a shadow and the motor of a Traction City. At only 18 years old, he started for an NBL team that made it to the finals.
There are, of course, areas of concern. The shooting is the main swing skill. Rupert hit only 27% from 3 over the past two seasons. But the form is without any mechanical issues, and featured a high release. He also hit 75% from the line over that time period, which hints at a level of hand-eye coordination that should translate to his 3-ball in time.
Others are concerned about his relatively meager burst and overall lack of shot creation. Again, I don’t get too worked up about self-creation deficits in prospects who project to be complementary players at the next level. I’m far more encouraged by Rupert’s nascent feel as a connective playmaker. He’s comfortable working off the dribble in advantage situations, and slings some very nice passes from there. He’s the prototypical late-growth-spurt player who developed point guard skills growing up. To me, these connective skills are far more relevant to his NBA projection than whether or not he can iso for buckets.
I think Rupert has solid odds to become a good-enough spot-up shooter over the next few years. Together with his feel for playmaking and cutting, I think there’s enough offensive value here to supplement his All-Defense upside. He needs to improve his finishing (42% from 2), but that should improve with added strength and maturity. Rupert is very much still filling into his body. He may have several leaps in his future.
18. Brandin Podziemski
Podz claims to have only started playing basketball in eight grade. While this seems apocryphal, his basketball instincts are stunningly real. His playmaking creativity and touch from all over the court evince an offensive upside far too tantalizing to pass up at this point in the draft.
There are athletic concerns, manifesting themselves in his foot speed on defense and ability to separate on offense. But again, I think these may be weighted too heavily relative to his considerable strengths. They may well hamper his median outcomes, but his 90th percentile outcome sees him overcome these deficits enough for his gifts to shine with dazzling incandescence.
He may also have a better shot at conquering these athletic limitations than one might think. The intersection of mid lateral agility + subpar length is a tough pill to swallow defensively. But a 6’6 wingspan is decent, and it’s possible he just tanked his standing reach at the combine. Also, his high steal rate and glitch-in-the-matrix rebound rate indicates a level of functional athleticism and anticipation to counterbalance his shortcoming in traditional athleticism. He may allow more blow-bys than average, but he’ll also make far more impact plays than average. On net, the results may just tilt in his favor.
19. Colby Jones
Jones is a little on the older side, and his game as a creator contains more pulp than juice. But there’s Derrick White/Josh Hart DNA in his veins as a two-way wing who can glow as a complementary player on a winning team.
Colby is one of the best connective playmakers in the class, slinging high-leverage passes which resulted in a 1.9 AST/TO ration, a ludicrous mark for a non-point guard. He needs to play off an advantage to get into the paint, but once there he has great touch (56% from 2). I also think he’ll be just good enough as a spot-up shooter to round out his skillset as a supporting offensive player, although the percentage here is a swing factor.
The defense is likewise a strong needle-mover. He’s got very good feel and activity as a team defender, with high rates of steal, rebounds, and blocks. I’m not sure he has the athletic pop to be a true wing stopper, but he’s bigger than advertised (8’7 standing reach), is comfortable guarding 1-3, fights in mismatch situations against bigger players, and navigates screens adeptly.
20. Keyonte George
Keyonte tends towards the Poole-Herro-Simons category of score-first combo guards with muted plus-minus impact that I’m generally lower on. However, at this point in the draft, any of those names are far from a bad outcome.
Keyonte also has some redeeming qualities that elevate him a clear tier above, say, Nick Smith Jr. He’s shown an ability to be an absolute 3-point bomber at 14 3FGA per 100, a trait that strains defenses out to 30 feet whether he’s on- or off-ball. The ball didn’t go in as much as you’d like, but he shoots a beautifully easy ball and has a strong shooting pedigree. Keyonte also holds up decently at the point of attack defensively, and his solid rebound and steal rates support the notion that he’s equipped with the physical profile to be at least neutral on that end.
The decision making is prone to glitches, but there are some flashes of passing vision. 42% from 2 is a concern, and indicates there’s not really upside here as a number one option. But if he can up the efficiency and cut the fat from his game (perhaps literally), there’s potential here to be a quality secondary creator with huge 3-point volume and enough defense to survive in the playoffs.
21. Noah Clowney
Clowney is a textbook case of extreme youth obscuring the outlines of mid-career role and production. He’s a theoretical versatile defensive big with a hypothetical 3-point shot. In reality, he’s not always laterally quick enough to slide with perimeter players, his rim protection is inconsistent with a mid block rate, and the shooting indicators lag far behind the fluidity of his form.
He is a monster finisher and a great rebounded for someone who spent much time on both ends scuttling around the perimeter. Clowney possesses a rare ability to catch the ball at the arc with a driving seam and then be on top of the rim two strides and less than a second later. He also shoots with a confidence and mechanical ease that few 6’10 18-year-olds can match. I think in time he’ll deliver floor-spacing value at either the 4 or 5. And the flashes of impact plays inside and out on defense indicate some fairly high-end outcomes as he gains strength and refines his overall technique.
22. Jett Howard
The league is increasingly evolving towards the dynamic, movement-centered offenses of the Kings, Nuggets, and Warriors. Howard’s dynamism as an offensive player is well-adapted to this environment. His shotmaking is frenetic, a sometimes on-ball, sometimes off-ball whirlwind of marksmanship that resulted in 14 3-point attempts per 100. And the connective playmaking is a nice complement. He leverages his shooting and size into passing windows, and possesses the vision and creativity to sling the ball through these windows. Whether he’s flying off a DHO, attacking a frenzied closeout, or handling in a second-side PnR, he has a keen sense for how to turn movement shooting into ball movement.
The defense and athleticism are rocky. It’s going to take immense effort and maybe a minor miracle for Jett to develop the level of defense and overall physicality necessary to stay on the court, especially in the playoffs.
23. Dariq Whitehead
Whitehead is a great shotmaker with prototypical wing size (6’10 wingspan, 8’8 standing reach). He was terrible inside the arc at Duke, with only a few passing flashes and middling mobility defending other guards. But the size, shooting ability, pedigree, and health upside – the second foot surgery gives one reason to believe this issue hampered him all year – are a strong enough argument for Whitehead to remain in the first round. Really, the defense only needs to get to roughly average for Dariq to fulfill a valuable NBA role. Now, there’s obvious health downside as well, but this late in the draft, downside is largely irrelevant. Any player taken this late needs to hit their 75th percentile outcome or greater to hang in the league as a rotation player, even.
24. Brice Sensabaugh
Sensabaugh was a dominating scorer in the Big Ten as a 19-year-old freshman. He also has a bullyball midrange game that (a) frequently struggles to translate against NBA athletes and (b) teams often are reluctant to build an offense around. Considering that he doesn’t pressure the rim, isn’t comfortable with the pull-up from NBA 3-point range, and lacks the vision to leverage his scoring into good offense at the team level, it’s even less likely an NBA team is sidetrack their offense in favor of giving Sensabaugh 20 mipost iso possessions a game.
Luckily, Sensabaugh does have incredible touch and shooting indicators which should give him value as a secondary offensive option who hits spot-up threes at a good clip. And there’s an off chance his playmaking and decision making take a big enough leap for teams to feel more comfortable running the offense through him. That’s enough for him to still be a first-round prospect for me.
The defense prevents him from rising any here, though. He doesn’t have a clear position on that end, lacking the length to be a full-time four and the foot speed to match up with wings or guards. He allowed tons of blow-bys, showed terrible technique, and fouled frequently. And the off-ball defense was probably even worse.
Also, there seems to be some concern about the long-term prognosis of Sensabaugh’s knees. Given that I am not a doctor, not an NBA team doctor, not employed by an NBA team, and not adjacent to anyone employed by an NBA team, I can’t say much about the knees.
25. Jordan Hawkins
The best movement shooter in the class, and I'm not sure it’s particularly close. Hawkins has an ability to fly into his shot at a dead sprint which is rare even for NBA shooting specialists. He’s going to generate huge 3-point volume from day one in the league, and I’d be surprised if he’s much below 40 percent accuracy.
The other stuff is dubious. Defensively, his college tape was mostly fine due to his good lateral quickness and high effort level. But his frame leaves him vulnerable to stronger players, and that’s mildly terrifying for his NBA projection. There’s going to be matchups, especially in the playoffs, where it’s hard to keep this guy on the court. Additionally, aside from a few nice passes and straight-line drives, he’s mostly ineffective leveraging the threat of his shot into other opportunities – 45% from 2 and a 9% assist rate are not encouraging.
Hawkins is more one-dimensional than just about any other player I have in the first round, but his shooting is so damn good that he still deserves to be here.
26. Julian Phillips
Another young wing with an intriguing set of tools, Phillips has promise as a 3 & D player with size, athleticism, and feel. The “3” part of that equation is more theoretical as this stage, but 82% from the line and solid percentages in high school shows there’s plenty to work with. The defense also isn’t as impactful off-ball as one would prefer, but he’s already a high-level on-ball defender with great lateral quickness, long arms, and switchability.
Phillips’ explosiveness is more good than great, and he needs to improve as a finisher. He does have encouraging feel for cutting, quick decision-making, and passing. An 11% assist rate and 1.1 AST/TO ratio is a pleasant surprise for this sort of athletic wing project. Combined with the versatile defense and the shooting upside, there’s enough here to warrant a first-round selection.
27. James Nnaji
Nnaji is a goliath, showcases good mobility, and plays rotation minutes for FC Barcelona at just 18. That’s the basic sales pitch here. He can’t pass, or dribble, or shoot, but he’s such a hellacious dunker and shot blocker that he still commands a first-round selection with the hope you can turn him into a Tyson Chandler-esque drop & dunk center.
Nnaji has only been playing basketball for a handful of years, yet shows pretty good feel on the defensive end. He has a general sense for how to play drop coverage, and even flashes some scheme versatility. His overall technique and intuition for verticality and legal guarding position has a long way to go, but Nnaji holds the potential for dominant interior defense.
28. Kris Murray
I’m not sure if Murray is a good shooter, but his 3-point volume shows that he definitely thinks so. I guess that’s reassuring. Everything else is more or less exactly what you’re looking for in a role player at the forward position. Murray is huge (8’10 standing reach), moves well defensively, finishes effectively inside the arc, inhales rebounds, and demonstrates good feel on both ends. He’s older than most prospects and doesn’t have any huge strengths, but, as long as he shoots it well enough, he doesn’t have any real weaknesses either.
29. Jalen Hood-Schifino
“Big ball handler” seems to be the main selling point for JHS, and while it’s a decent heuristic for selecting prospects with high upside, it’s far from a universal law of nature. Dalano Banton and Leandro Bolmaro are both big ball handlers.
To me, the more instructive perspective on Hood-Schifino acknowledges that his offensive value is dependent on a high volume on PnR reps. Yet his combination of inefficient scoring, nonexistent rim pressure, and good-but-not-great playmaking makes one wonder what NBA team is ever handing him the reigns of the offense. He is the archetypal Second-Tier Creator.
And yes, JHS is a good playmaker, not a great one. His inability to pressure the defense either at the rim or behind the arc results in a lack of open shots created for teammates. And while he makes some very nice passes, the overall results are more mixed. 20% assist rate and 1.3 AST/TO is not the stuff of an elite lead guard prospect. The typical excuses of a bad offensive environment may be offered, but I’m not buying it. Hood-Schifino ran a high volume of PnR’s with the best roll man scorer in the country – close to half of JHS’s assists were to Trayce Jackson-Davis.
I think JHS’s game on both ends captures a pair of strong aesthetic biases – offensively, with the silky-smooth midrange game, and defensively, with the intense on-ball defense. The midrange game is generally much better used as a counter than a bread-and-butter (and this is coming from the guy who wrote 3000+ words on the value of the midrange). Unfortunately, JHS’s midrange shot is very much his bread-and-butter. He made 42%, which is good, but again, not great, as it ranks at about the 70th percentile for all first-round picks who took at least 100 midrange shots in a season in the Bart Torvik database. And yes, he was very much a guy who could pull up his shorts and get into ball handlers defensively. Yet, when paired with a lack of off-ball impact plays, this is often a style of defense that gets overrated – just look at Klay Thompson’s defensive RAPM numbers over his prime years.
Ultimately, I just struggle to see the fit for JHS at the next level. He’s just not good enough as a scorer and playmaker to command primary ball handling duties on a good NBA team, and his subpar athleticism and iffy 3-point shooting mute his value as a cutter or spot-up threat off the ball. And the statistical projection doesn’t do him any favors, either. JHS is poised to become just the 10th player in the Bart Torvik database to be taken in the first round after posting a negative BPM as a freshman. The most successful career on that list belongs to Kenneth Faried. The second-most successful belongs to Elfrid Payton. Seems suboptimal.
And for those reasons, I’m out... almost. There’s still just enough on-ball defense, ball handling, and shooting potential for Hood-Schifino to be worth a late first-round pick.
30. Marcus Sasser
You can certainly do worse here than a 3 & D guard with a strong frame and a 6’7 wingspan. The passing, decision making, and ability to get on and off the ball frictionlessly in the flow of an NBA offense will have to improve. But there’s enough wing playmaking in the NBA today that a guard-sized player without much playmaking can be workable. Sasser could fit very well next to big ball handlers like Luka, Paolo, Cade, etc.
It also shouldn’t go unsaid that the shooting is elite of the elite. He has deep range and the ability to hoist threes at huge volume. The defense is also rife with winning plays both on and off the ball.
A few more names
Nick Smith Jr.
I anointed Jalen Hood-Schifino as the archetypal Second-Tier Creator. Nick Smith Jr. might be an even better candidate. I realize he was struggling with some lingering injury issues all year. But for someone deemed to have elite “touch,” you’d expect him to compensate a bit better for a balky knee. Guards with truly elite touch can match 40% from 2 and 47% true shooting with an amputated leg. He doesn’t leverage his scoring into passing opportunities particularly well, and I’m not sure he has the level of shooting necessary to make this whole package work.
Oliver-Maxence Prosper
I wasn’t quite as impressed with his on-ball defense as some, and everything else is a bit shakier than I’d like from an older prospect. The shooting is iffy, the off-ball defensive impact plays are infrequent, and the overall feel is lacking.
Jaime Jacquez Jr.
I wanted to find this guy a spot in the first round. The questionable lateral quickness and perimeter shooting just didn’t quite allow for it. We should also address the hilarity of reports that Jaime is “taking no prisoners” in workouts.
For instance, if a player with a long-term 3FG% of 35% takes a sample of 50 threes, over 13% of the time they’ll either shoot (a) 46% or higher, or (b) 24% or lower. A whopping 55% of the time they’ll either shoot (a) 40% or higher, or (b) 30% or lower. I think this level of variance is higher than intuition might suggest. Additionally, a player’s expected shooting percentage is a nonstationary process — on some days, a player might just be hot, and their expected 3FG% might tick up to 38% or even 40%. Other days, they might be cold, or nursing a nagging ankle injury that throws off their jumper. Moreover, shot quality only adds to this nonstationarity. One week, a player might get a bunch of open catch-and-shoot looks that they would be expected to make at a higher percentage. The next week, they might take an unusually large proportion of contested jumpers with a lower expected percentage. All of these issues serve only to increase the expected variance above the levels I specified earlier. The takeaway here is that we should take any 50- or even 100-sample with a sizable grain of salt. Just ask Derrick Williams, who shot 57% on 74 3-point attempts his last season at Arizona.