2024 NBA Draft Thread - SUMMER LEAGUE JULY 6TH

Tuesday can’t come soon enough man. Cade is #1 of course but I’ve talked myself into all of the top 4 guys.

Also it seems like the rockets have worked out Tre Mann and JT Thor so far. I like what Stone is thinking. Our scouting team has been pretty good so I am confident in this draft


 
Decided to put a tiered big board together. Wrote it in my Notes so the formatting is weird. Don't pay attention to the numbers. Would probably have like another 10 guys in tier 6, but I stopped at 30 players.


Tier 1
  1. Cade Cunningham
  2. Jalen Green
Tier 2
  1. Jalen Suggs
  2. Evan Mobley
Tier 3
  1. Jonathan Kuminga
  2. Scottie Barnes
Tier 4
  1. Jalen Johnson
  2. James Bouknight
  3. Moses Moody
  4. Alperen Sengun
Tier 5
  1. Josh Giddey
  2. Davion Mitchell
  3. Franz Wagner
  4. Ziaire Williams
  5. Kai Jones
  6. Isaiah Jackson
  7. Keon Johnson
  8. Usman Garuba
  9. Corey Kispert
  10. Sharife Cooper
  11. Tre Mann
Tier 6
  1. Jared Butler
  2. Chris Duarte
  3. Jaden Springer
  4. Cam Thomas
  5. Aya Dosunmu
  6. Miles McBride
  7. Greg Brown
  8. Roko Prkacin
  9. Kessler Edwards
 
B Sox said:
Decided to put a tiered big board together. Wrote it in my Notes so the formatting is weird. Don't pay attention to the numbers. Would probably have like another 10 guys in tier 6, but I stopped at 30 players.


Tier 1
  1. Cade Cunningham
  2. Jalen Green
Tier 2
  1. Jalen Suggs
  2. Evan Mobley
Tier 3
  1. Jonathan Kuminga
  2. Scottie Barnes
Tier 4
  1. Jalen Johnson
  2. James Bouknight
  3. Moses Moody
  4. Alperen Sengun
Tier 5
  1. Josh Giddey
  2. Davion Mitchell
  3. Franz Wagner
  4. Ziaire Williams
  5. Kai Jones
  6. Isaiah Jackson
  7. Keon Johnson
  8. Usman Garuba
  9. Corey Kispert
  10. Sharife Cooper
  11. Tre Mann
Tier 6
  1. Jared Butler
  2. Chris Duarte
  3. Jaden Springer
  4. Cam Thomas
  5. Aya Dosunmu
  6. Miles McBride
  7. Greg Brown
  8. Roko Prkacin
  9. Kessler Edwards
Click to expand...
Sounds about where I see these kids except I put Williams in tier 4
 


John Hollinger’s Top 20 NBA draft prospects for 2021: Cade Cunningham ranks No. 1 — but not by much

Wait, didn’t we just do this? In the wake of a compressed NBA season and a delayed 2020 draft, we are indeed jumping back into Draft World a mere eight months after our last cycle.

Nonetheless, some things have changed since the last draft. We’re once again having a Draft Combine, for one, and scouts will be able to see players in person, both here at this week’s event and at a series of agent-run “Pro Days” scheduled for the beginning of next week.

The latter innovation is designed to improve upon what had been a series of far-flung, agent-run events around the country the week after the combine; coordinating it this way provides one-stop shopping for teams and, with a captive audience in attendance, more eyeballs to see each player. While some will no doubt miss trading their Santa Monica-Las Vegas-Tampa itineraries for an extended stay in Chicago, on balance this is a much better way to operate.

As for the draft itself? Once again, there is no sure-thing centerpiece at the top for Tuesday’s lottery winner, no Anthony Davis or LeBron James with certain superstardom in his future. Similar to last year’s draft with LaMelo Ball, James Wiseman and Anthony Edwards, teams will need to dive in and study a few different players. The consensus top 2021 prospects are Oklahoma State’s Cade Cunningham and USC’s Evan Mobley.

From my perspective, this draft is also a bit different in terms of how its depth shakes out. I’d be really happy to have a pick in the top nine, or something in the mid-20s. However, the depth of this group sort of craters after the top nine picks, leaving a lot of speculative-type selections in the teens, or non-speculative selections on near-certain role players. The 20s and 30s offer less risk in a way, as there are a number of players worth taking a flier on in this part of my board. The fail rate is high enough that it’s not a big worry if they don’t pan out.

For now, lets go back to my basic rule that I introduced eight months ago: 20 players. My mission is to try to find the 20 guys in this draft that I think will make it, since that’s usually the number of rotation-caliber players each draft produces. (No, I’m not counting the “rotation” minutes gifted to every lottery pick, I mean players that actually stick around and help).

I do need to confess I actually cheated a bit. Last year I expanded that list to include three sleepers, and I’m pretty happy that Desmond Bane was one of them (we’ll wait to see how Malachi Flynn and Elijah Hugest turn out). I did the same thing this year.

I’ll get to the rest of my draft board, spots 24 through 70, in a few weeks, once we know who is actually staying in this draft and who isn’t. But with the lottery coming up and virtually all the top-tier talent making their intentions to stay in the draft known, I can share the top of my board now.

1. Cade Cunningham, SG/SF, Oklahoma State, Freshman

The default that Cunningham is the best player in this draft has perhaps not been challenged enough. I ended up with him No. 1 as well, but reasonable people can disagree among the top four players on my board.

Ultimately, the best reason to pick Cunningham is that his elite shooting gives him the highest floor of any player in the draft. Cunningham shot 40.0% from 3-point range and 84.6% from the line, and many of those 3s were tough looks off the dribble. His catch-and-shoots look perfect, and he has the size to shoot over any closeout. That perimeter skill set, from a big wing who can handle and pass, makes Khris Middleton-type outcomes seem reasonably likely.

Finding big wings with skill of any stripe is also the most difficult thing for any NBA team to pull off. These players are massively valuable, as the playoffs once again show us, and should be the priority of any team’s draft process.

Where I push back is the idea that Cunningham can be “The Man,” the guy you give the keys to the offense on Day 1 and never look back. For me he’s much more of a secondary creator who can weaponize his shooting threat rather than the guy you play on the ball for 60 trips a game.

In particular, Cunningham’s game off the bounce strikes me as wildly overrated. He has a loose handle that gets away from him fairly often, particularly with his left hand. He also constantly forces passes, and rarely makes deliveries that make you go “ooh!” (They’re in there if you look hard enough, but man there’s a lot of chaff in between the wheat). He can throw crosscourt passes with his right hand but they’re not laser beams; the defense has a chance to recover.

Between the lost dribbles and wayward passes, Cunningham had a sky-high turnover rate for a prospect of this magnitude (or any prospect, really), giving it away 7.0 times per 100, and a meh assist rate of 5.0 per 100. In fairness, we should allow some for context: The surrounding roster was not exactly an offensive juggernaut and was particularly deficient in 3-point shooting, limiting Cunningham’s operating space and assist options.

As a scoring threat on the ball, he really struggled to get by defenders. Attempts to blow by bigs on switches often ended with him dribbling straight into a defender’s chest, and he rarely got all the way to the basket. Overall he shot only 46.1% on 2s. Again, the limited spacing on this roster didn’t help. I like Cunningham a lot better if he starts with a half-step advantage or can leverage his shooting threat against a closing defender. Luka Doncic he ain’t.

Defensively, he’s good enough. He uses his length well and can slide his feet but he’s not a disruptor or somebody who anticipates for steals. He won’t be NBA All-Defense or anything, but he’ll be able to switch across positions and hold his own. Again, a floor as a high-level 3-and-D guy is pretty darned good. It’s just may not be what we’re used to for the top overall pick.

Cunningham is also a cool, unflappable customer with a penchant for big shots. He is clearly an NBA starter from Day 1, and the possibilities of elite shooting gives him Jayson Tatum upside. His inability to beat defenders off the dribble may not matter if he’s rising up for 30-footers against them.

Overall, he’s my pick here. But it’s not the home run some make it out to be, and I’m hoping the team drafting him has another playmaker.

2. Evan Mobley, PF/C, USC, Freshman

Even the way the game is going small, Mobley has an argument to be the top pick. His basic premise is that he can do most of the things perimeter guys can but he’s the size of a center. You can make an argument that Mobley is better at self-created shots inside the 3-point line than Cunningham is, and is also better at defending the perimeter. So we call Mobley a “big” and Cunningham a “wing,” but other than Cunningham’s shooting, Mobley is better at most of the wing stuff, too.

In 2021, however, a big has to be pretty darned good to make a case for himself as being more valuable than a wing with size. Surely there are exceptions – Nikola Jokic won the MVP award, and Joel Embiid was the East’s most dominant player this season — but the bar is higher for bigs.

Mobley is fortunately the right kind of big because it is going to be very hard to play him off the court in the playoffs. His skinny frame, skill set and defensive mobility almost immediately conjure images of Chris Bosh. In particular, some of his defensive clips had me cackling, as guards embarrassed themselves trying to take him off the bounce. He’s great at keeping his feet moving and using his length to contest shots when picking up guards in switches.

That said, you wish Mobley was better at some of the things that actually involve being big. He’s not notably good at posting up, owing in part to his very slender frame. His Rebound Rate was unimpressive and he gets pushed around near the basket, where his thin frame becomes a liability. Statistically he’s a good but not great shot-blocker, although that partly results from how often he had to defend on the perimeter. His motor doesn’t always run super-hot, either.

Offensively, Mobley hints at upside in all kinds of directions but doesn’t have one overwhelming skill at the moment. As noted above, he’s pretty good when he can attack off the bounce, even against guards. He can put the ball on the floor, score off the dribble as a driver from the free-throw area and finish near the cup. He shows rudiments of stretch ability, making 12 3-pointers on the season and shooting 69.4% from the line, and his form suggests he can at least become a break-even proposition as a shooter.

Mobley has All-Star upside, with shades of Bosh and Pau Gasol in his game, but he has work ahead of him to get there.

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% 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 can finish over any guard at 6-foot-9, 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, with the size to check interior players but 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 is 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’s 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’s 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 legitimately 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 this 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 3, 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

A medium-risk, high-reward type pick, Green is a skinny, athletic shooting guard with blast-off quickness and elite leaping ability. You can’t teach this stuff, and it’s why he’s a certain high lottery pick. He’s the one guy who made the most “holy ****” plays in this draft, with fast-twitch hops reminiscent of Zach LaVine.

Green got off to a slow start in the G League but really picked up his play toward the end, figuring out how to take advantage of his speed and leaping ability to get to the rim. His weaknesses right now are all skill-based. He has to play off the ball because his handle isn’t ever advanced; he frequently lost his dribble making relatively basic moves in pick-and-roll. His shooting is decent but hardly exceptional, and he relies too much on step-back 3s because he lacks advanced maneuvers with the rock. As a passer, he’s capable of basic reads but that part of his game is still coming around. He’s not selfish; he just doesn’t have the whole picture yet.

He is decent defensively but not exceptional. Green should be able to draft into passing lines more often than he does, and his first slide actually looks slow – it’s surprising how often he was beaten off the dribble. However, he competed, and he has the athleticism to surprise shooters with shot challenges.

Green is only 19 and was a good but not great G League player last season, so we’re talking about a developmental pick here. But his ceiling is high enough to make it worthwhile.

6. Jalen Suggs, PG, Gonzaga, Freshman

Suggs reminds me of Jason Kidd in a lot of ways, although the passing is more solid than spectacular. He has pretty good size for a point guard and great end-to-end speed, plus he has absolutely tremendous anticipation at the defensive end. Suggs reads the game almost like defensive back, closing on the ball with speed to intercept passes. His feet are only average on the ball and he can get caught reaching, but overall he projects as a tough defender.

Offensively, his pace in transition is an obvious benefit that helps grease the way to easy baskets, but his halfcourt game remains a work in progress. Suggs shot 33.7% from 3 and 75.4% from the line, so teams will dare him to prove he can knock down shots consistently. The good news is that Suggs has a quick release that he’s comfortable getting it off the dribble, and he shows pretty good footwork getting into pull-ups in the painted area on pivots and up-and-unders. He doesn’t need to improve his percentages that much to turn the shooting from a liability to a strength.

Bigger picture, the upside as an elite offensive player is maybe a bit limited by the shooting and the lack of elite pick-and-roll craft. That’s why Suggs is a bit lower on my board than some others. After my top five prospects, however, Suggs is the obvious pick due to his long-term starter potential and fairly high floor for such a young player.

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 halfcourt, 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 rarely screws up, resulting in a better than 2-1 assist-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

Kuminga is the next level of big wing shot-creator in this class. Right now he’s a good ways behind Cunningham and Barnes in terms of his ability to read the game and make plays for others, with a skill set more reminiscent of younger versions of Harrison Barnes or Andrew Wiggins.

In Kuminga’s G League stint, he showed the size and skill to dribble himself into pull-up 2s and occasionally make them. Unfortunately he also revealed an almost unslakable thirst for this particular shot and an iffy ability to generate better ones.

Kuminga was an ineffective passer and, while a good athlete, doesn’t have the blow-by gear or wiggle that would allow him generate easier opportunities than the ones for which he routinely settles. One area where he did seem very comfortable, however, was facing up a defender from the free throw line. From there he could get to the basket with one dribble and finish with his size.

Kuminga has the size and lateral quickness to be the multi-positional defender that teams crave (he’ll be at a disadvantage against the fastest guards, though who isn’t), but his instincts are miles behind. He also was a disappointingly poor rebounder for a player for this ilk. That said, he’s 6-foot-8 with some legit perimeter skill, and will be one of the youngest players in the draft with an October 2002 birthdate. (Yes, virtually every player in this draft was born this century. Sigh …. I know.)

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, as he is not a great shooter, and as a driver and finisher was much more effective operating in transition than in the halfcourt.

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 we had in Memphis, James Johnson; like his namesake, this Johnson can play as a big while operating as an on-ball creator on offense, but 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, with 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 plus 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

Similar to Kuminga, Giddey is 6-foot-8 with perimeter skills. Unlike Kuminga, he only exists in two dimensions. Yes, Giddey needs to pack on a bit of muscle, but his play in a physical professional league in Australia shows that he can be an impact player without looking like Hercules.

Again, big wings who can dribble and pass are the gold every scout seeks, which gives Giddey a solid boost up the list here. His upside scenarios are reminiscent of Toni Kukoc or Joe Ingles with a right hand. The reason he doesn’t go any higher, however, has to do with some of the limitations that could prove fail points in this development.

For starters, there is his shot. Giddey shot 29.3% from 3 and 69.1% from the line this season, and while he relied some on self-created 3s, the eye test backs up the numbers in this case. He shoots an awkward, elbow-out jumper flicked off his forehead, and he’s going to need that shot to open up the rest of his game. Giddey doesn’t have the burst to get to the cup on his own steam consistently and for that reason was an underwhelming scorer Down Under (10.8 points per game, exactly 50.0% on 2s).

His ability to guard on the perimeter is also a question, especially given his thin frame and limited vertical. Giddey wasn’t afraid to stick his nose in and rebound, however, with a 12.8% Rebound Rate in a pretty brutish league.

The reason to draft Giddey is for his passing. His ability to make deliveries with either hand at his age is pretty special; he just has to good enough at the other stuff that it’s worth putting him on the ball. Unlike the other prospects who have played in Australia, Giddey legitimately impacted winning as a teenager. He’ll also be nearly the youngest player in the draft, with an October 2002 birthdate.

The size, passing and youth make for a strong case. Relative the players above him, however, Giddey has two minuses – athleticism and shooting – and at least one of them needs to turn in his favor.

11. Jared Butler, PG/SG, Baylor, Junior

I’m a big fan of Butler, a butter-smooth guard with a sweet handle, long arms, good defensive anticipation and a money outside shot. Butler shot 41.6% on 3s on high volume, had a high assist rate for a combo guard, and shot 52.4% inside the arc while scoring at a high rate (31.0 points per 100). All the tools are there for a rotation-caliber combo guard with starter upside. While his teammate Davion Mitchell has gotten more of the praise recently, Butler is two years younger, bigger, had the greater offensive role and profiles as a better shooter.

Defensively, he might not be as insanely wired to cut off dribble penetration as Mitchell, but he has long arms that generate deflections and close up passing lanes. Baylor was a high-pressure team so all their steal rates are inflated, but his 4.2 swipes per 100 possessions in Big 12 play was the highest of any prospect in his draft cycle.

Butler doesn’t offer elite upside because his size and athleticism are pretty unremarkable and he was already a junior, though he might have the best handle of any player in the draft and his offensive game is exceptionally well-rounded. I have a hard time seeing how he fails.

However, based on background teams have done, there is a concern about what Butler’s physical will turn up at the Draft Combine this week. We’ll likely know more about that after teams dissect the information in a few weeks. But if Butler gets a clean bill from the doctors, it’s hard for me to avoid putting him in the lottery.

12. Corey Kispert, SF, Gonzaga, Senior

Holy crap, a senior!

We’re getting into a different strata of player here, because Kispert has near-zero star equity. That said, big wings who can shoot are one of the most valuable player archetypes, and Kispert checks all the boxes for this species. While there remains a pretty big variance between this pick turning out to be more like Doug McDermott (meh) or more like Joe Harris (wahoowa!!), Kispert offers near-certain rotation caliber shooting at the expense of the upside you’d usually want at this stage of the late lottery. Kispert is also 22, which makes him a fossil relative to the other players available here.

Defensively, Kispert looked pretty solid for a player of this ilk. He’s not a disruptor but his strength is an underrated asset; allowing him to match up with some 4s and hold his own against post-ups. On the perimeter, he relies on his length against smalls and will concede space and some jump shots, however he moves his feet to cut off driving lanes and is very good at using verticality. I don’t think he’ll have a target on his back.

We should also talk about some of the upside here as a scorer. I realize Gonzaga didn’t play a tough schedule, but Kispert’s game wasn’t just 3s. He scored 33.0 points per 100 and shot 64% inside the arc; he’s actually a really good finisher off straight-line drives because of his size and strength, and pretty good in transition, too. He weaponized that with his 3-point threat; he hit 44.0% and 43.8% from 3 his final two seasons at Gonzaga, so you better close out on him hard.

One thing I didn’t like about Kispert was his low release point. I don’t think he’s the type of guy who’s going to run away from his defense and come off two pin screens wheeling and dealing; he’s better off spotting up away from the play. But he has the tools to be an elite weak-side offensive player.

13. James Bouknight, SG, Connecticut, Sophomore

Pronounced “Bucket.” Okay, it’s not, but it should be. He’s a bit undersized for a shooting guard and a bit greedy for a point, but Bouknight’s ability to get this own shot stands out in this class.

Bouknight averaged an eye-popping 39.3 points per 100 possessions in nine Big East games as a sophomore at UConn this season, despite a midseason injury that seemed to affect his shooting once he came back. He can take it to the cup and finish with long strides and length (54.5% on 2s in Big East with a high free throw rate), plus he gets off the floor on his jumper and is comfortable shooting pull-ups off the dribble.

That doesn’t make him wart-free. You’d like to see more consistency in his perimeter stroke (29.3% from 3 this year, 32.0% career, although he’s an 80% foul shooter); opponents may just go under screens on him and dare him to bomb way. Bouknight also needs to increase his feel as a passer if he wants to play a prominent on-ball role. His rate of 3.2 assists per 100 was unacceptable for a high-volume guard.

Bouknight needs to show a bit more verve defensively. He shows good lateral quickness, has decent length and competes when he’s guarding on the ball, but he also chills out off the ball and doesn’t anticipate plays. He also needs to build up his skinny frame, as opposing 2s will likely try to take him on the block. One encouraging sign: He does rebound, with 10.2 boards per 100 in Big East play.

The value proposition here is that high-level shot creation still matters. Bouknight has a lot of Jordan Clarkson in him, both for good and bad, but it’s not hard to imagine him becoming an annual Sixth Man winner.

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

My rule of thumb, as ever: Guys who play in high-level European leagues as teenagers and hold their own don’t fail. Garuba played a total of 86 games (!) for Real Madrid this year as a rotation big at the age of 18, showed fairly steady improvement as the year went on and probably can be an NBA-caliber defender from Day 1 as either a 4 or a smallball 5.

However, I can’t put him any higher than this because of the potential limitations on the offensive side. He’s a good athlete but not a freak, and he’s undersized at the 5. So where is his advantage? At 6-foot-8 without elite shot-blocking or rebounding numbers on his resume, he’s going to have a hard time carving out a role as a full-time center even in a downsized NBA. Adding enough skill to play some minutes next to a true 5 is going to be his pathway to becoming a starting-caliber player.

On that front, Garuba remains a work in progress. He flies up and down the court in transition and has started to steady his 3-point shot from the corners (31.6% this year). He also actually shows some ball skills when his team lets him paint outside the lines. That said, Garuba isn’t a great finisher around the basket.

Ultimately, I see a potential comparison for Garuba as a bigger version of Toronto’s OG Anunoby. He can guard on the perimeter, and his switchability means he won’t get played off the floor. At least on defense. He needs the shooting to come around to have starter value, and that’s why he’s just outside the lottery on my board.

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 *** to play against.

Mitchell was also one of the country’s most improved players at the offensive end. He shot 44.7% 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% 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% from the line, and finished his career at 65.7%. Even comparing Usage Rates this year, Butler had far more of the offense on his shoulders than Mitchell. 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

I originally had McBride in my “sleepers” area, but when I went back to tape I kept saying, “this guy is good.” Not that I should be surprised. Every year, the Big 12 is guaranteed to produce at least one high-character guy who plays his tuckus off and knows what he’s doing and ends up having a 10-year career even though he wasn’t drafted highly and doesn’t have elite athleticism. Last year it was Desmond Bane. This year McBride is that guy.

Let’s start on the downside. McBride is 6-foot-2 and plays with more of a shooting guard’s instincts. He doesn’t get all the way to the rim as often as you’d like for a point guard and settles for a ton of pull-up jumpers, resulting in a disappointing 43.9% mark on 2s – a number that sank to just 40.8% in Big 12 play. That’s indicative of some limitations.

But the good stuff that offsets it is so plentiful. One reason he depends on pull-ups is that he’s a good shooter with a really comfortable stroke off the dribble, one that should easily translate into off-the-dribble 3s coming off pick-and-roll screens as a pro. McBride shot disappointingly few 3s, actually, but made 41.4% of them and hit 81.5% from the line.

And then there’s the defense. McBride’s feet can be heavy at times, but he plays with tremendous effort and uses his long arms as a weapon, nabbing 3.1 steals per 100 possessions in Big 12 play. He’s not content to ease off ballhandlers, instead going up into the dribbler and betting that his hands and feet will be enough. He’s also surprisingly quick rising up and contesting shots. Despite the high-pressure style, McBride also had an extremely low foul rate: just 2.8 per 100 possessions, nearly the lowest of any prospect, and certainly the lowest of anyone who was actually trying.

His package screams rotation guard, with a high-character background that makes you more confident he can maximize whatever his upside is. McBride has been pegged in the 30s and 40s for most of this draft cycle and was rumored to still be pondering a return to school, but I still wonder if I have him too low here.

18. Keon Johnson, SG, Tennessee, Freshman

Most projections have him in the lottery, but I can’t quite get as excited about Johnson as my peers. I understand the basic premise: After the sure things are off the board, maybe the next-best move is to draft an electric athlete who only recently turned 19 and see what happens. Johnson is a high-flier who might have the best YouTube dunk clips of any prospect and seems to have decent lateral mobility.

But man, there are warts a plenty here. He’s 6-foot-5 but often looked more like an undersized power forward than a shooting guard. His offense consisted mainly of righ-hand dribbles into mid-range pull-ups that went in just often enough to keep shooting them, and for a guy with pogo hops his rates of rebounds and blocks were a crushing disappointment. Bizarrely, Johnson couldn’t shoot a pull-up going to his left; he had to stop and spin 270 degrees back to his right to launch.

Johnson isn’t a 3-point threat (27.1% from 3 on low volume and 70.2% from the line), and while you wouldn’t describe his shot as broken, he’s a long way from being an even average perimeter weapon. The best thing you could say about his jumper is that he gets into it easily off the dribble and can elevate and release it over nearly anybody. A lot of times you wish he couldn’t.

It’s possible being away from a constipated Tennessee offense that seemed intent on strangling itself will give Johnson more opportunities to shine. It’s also possible a lower-usage role (his 26.8% Usage Rate was pretty high for a player of this ilk) would take better advantage of his skill set.

And there is some upside here. As an on-ball player, Johnson was able to find open men as a passer and make some genuinely good reads in pick-and-roll. His handle, however, is as basic as they come. He rarely got all the way to the rim and operated almost entirely in straight lines. He also showed some real shortcomings as a finisher, with poor balance and body control once he got moving toward the basket and a need to jump off two feet.

In this draft there are 15 other players like this. Prospects we describe as “young and a good athlete but about the basketball …”. Of those, Johnson is the best at actual basketball and probably the best athlete, too. There’s a decent chance he fails, but there’s also a right tail where he turns into DeMar DeRozan.

19. Chris Duarte, SG/SF, Oregon, Senior

Duarte isn’t for everyone, as he will be 24 years old when training camp opens. History tells us drafting old guys has often turned out badly, and that there is a lot less upside in picking Duarte versus picking players who are as much as a half decade younger.

That said, this is where the selling proposition on Duarte looks reasonable. He is an NBA rotation wing right now, and may even be a starter. There is no development curve, no having to use our imagination to color in lines that might not be there.

Duarte is a good shooter (42.4% from 3 on high volume) and a deft operator around the rim who shot a staggering 63.1% on 2s, even in a high-volume role that saw him average 31.3 points per 100 in conference. He handles the ball well enough to be a secondary operator, finishing with a positive assist-to-turnover ratio, and can guard 2s and 3s. He also anticipates well off the ball, with a stellar 3.3 per 100 steal rate in Pac 12 play).

That combination likely yields a relatively unsexy package of a plus backup wing who can maybe start, but think of this as a free agent move. By nabbing Duarte outside the lottery, a team is basically getting four years of a $10 million player on a $3 million contract for four years. The tradeoff is that they give up on the improbable but still theoretically possible opportunity to pick a teenager and wind up with a $30 million player a few years down the road.

20. Jaden Springer, PG/SG, Tennessee, Freshman

I went back and forth several times on Springer, but ultimately I lean toward betting on him for two reasons. First, his birth certificate. Springs won’t turn 19 until September, so he still has time on his side to push his development forward.

The other reason to bet on him is his defense. Whatever you think of his offensive game, the defense was legit. Springer is a bit short for a shooting guard and a bit slow for a point guard, but he’s strong, competes, moves his feet, and keeps his hands active. He’ll need that kind of feistiness and attention to make it at the next level because he’s not a superior athlete, though the defense should buy him time for the offense to come around.

As for the offense … the eye test wasn’t as bullish as the stats. Springer made 43.5% of his 3s, but it was on extremely low volume for a guard (just 46 all year) and his jumper appears to have a slight hitch. (This is where seeing games in person would have been in helpful, but c’est la …). Instead, he is hugely reliant on pull-up 2s that he may have a hard time getting to against NBA defenses.

Springer is strong enough to body himself some space for his shot at times, and he does elevate pretty well and have a high release point, but at 6-4 without crazy hops, it’s a tough shot to count on. More reliably, perhaps, is drawing fouls, which he also did at a high rate, and his free-throw shooting (81.0%) offers some hope for his overall shooting.

No matter what, he’ll need to cut down on the turnovers that plagued him as a freshman; as with Johnson above, playing in a real offense might help.

Three sleepers

These guys aren’t getting lottery buzz, or anything like it, but I’m much higher on all three and interested to see where their draft stock heads as the big day draws closer.

21. Roko Prkacin, PF, KK Ciboria

History says teams undervalue youth in the draft. So let’s talk about the youngest player in the draft, Prkacin, who won’t turn 19 until Thanksgiving weekend.

That age is irrelevant unless he can play, obviously, but Prkacin had a good year overseas and shows the physical tools to do more as he gets older. Prkacin is 6-foot-9 with square shoulders and long arms, and rebounded like a center despite playing on the perimeter in the admittedly not-quite-elite Adriatic League. He could end up being a 5 or at least a 4/5 half a decade down the road. But he also had a solid steal rate for this size, and the eye test backs up the idea that he can move.

Offensively, he has a lot of the basic elements and now needs to refine them. His form on 3s still needs tightening but he managed to make 35.0% of his 160 attempts across competitions this year. A 65.0% mark at the line is a worrisome countertrend. He can handle the ball for his size, however, and shows an unusual knack for runners and floaters.

Prkacin has the size and mobility to be a good defender, too, but he still shows some confusion defending in pick-and-roll and switching situations. Again, cut him some slack: He was 17 when the season started.

Prakcin’s lack of draft buzz oddly makes him an even better choice; late draft picks are much more acceptably stashed overseas, which would probably be the best development pathway for him in the short term.

22. Neemias Queta, C, Utah State, Junior

My membership in the Neemias Queta fan club is already well established so I won’t go too deep down the rabbit hole this time. Suffice to say that despite my general misgivings about drafting centers, I think the 7-foot Queta can offer a lot of value and some relative upside.

Queta still has to get better defending away from the basket, and that’s a concern for any big man in today’s NBA. The Aggies always played him in a deep drop so he didn’t get many chances to show perimeter quickness, but his rare forays away from the charge circle weren’t tragic. He’s a little slow laterally but not as bad as some other 5s getting more draft hype, plus he showed a real ability to close down space and block shots from behind at the basket.

Offensively, Queta added something to his game every year at Utah State and by the end was a legitimately good passer who also had a variety of 1-on-1 moves to score on the block. Utah State’s plodding pace masked just how effective he was: Queta averaged 30 points and 6 assists per 100 possessions in Mountain West play. For comparison, Cade Cunningham averaged 31 and 5.

This train is still going up. Queta arrived at Utah State as a raw freshman from Portugal and has added bits and pieces to his game since. His skill level can still go forward from here, but he’ll always be 7-feet tall.

23. Herb Jones, SF/PF, Alabama, Senior

Finally, we have Jones, the last guy in this draft that I’d at least feel somewhat comfortable betting on before the real dart-tossing begins. So-called “shutdown corners” aren’t quite as valuable now in the switch-everything era as they were when he could just sick Tony Allen on an opponent’s top scorer and call it a day. That said, defense still matters, and Jones is really good at it. At 6-foot-8 with good feet, piliferous hands and a knack for drawing charges, Jones might be the best perimeter defender in this draft aside from Barnes. As with Barnes, his size and dexterity make him a true defensive chameleon. Jones is capable of checking the other team’s point guard but also line up as a smallball 5 in the right matchup.

As for the offense, well … that’s why he’s 23. It’s possible Jones is just too tragic on offense to hold down a rotation spot. That said, he’s improved quite a bit. Jones even made 20 3s this season – more than in his first three seasons combined – and improved his handle and decisions enough to finish with a positive assist-to-turnover mark. In a more wide-open NBA floor, Jones’s slashing and size to finish at the basket could also reap some rewards.

Jones is one of the few upperclassmen that pack some upside in the form of a still-developing offensive game. But his defense provides a relatively sure thing to at least give some value. He’s projected for the second round now, but I’d grab him earlier.
 
youngwolf said:
Don’t care who wins the lottery tonight. I just want the Rockets to lose their pick.
Click to expand...
E7F2640F-5530-4C52-91AB-65E8B24DFC26.gif
 
pmatic said:


John Hollinger’s Top 20 NBA draft prospects for 2021: Cade Cunningham ranks No. 1 — but not by much

Wait, didn’t we just do this? In the wake of a compressed NBA season and a delayed 2020 draft, we are indeed jumping back into Draft World a mere eight months after our last cycle.

Nonetheless, some things have changed since the last draft. We’re once again having a Draft Combine, for one, and scouts will be able to see players in person, both here at this week’s event and at a series of agent-run “Pro Days” scheduled for the beginning of next week.

The latter innovation is designed to improve upon what had been a series of far-flung, agent-run events around the country the week after the combine; coordinating it this way provides one-stop shopping for teams and, with a captive audience in attendance, more eyeballs to see each player. While some will no doubt miss trading their Santa Monica-Las Vegas-Tampa itineraries for an extended stay in Chicago, on balance this is a much better way to operate.

As for the draft itself? Once again, there is no sure-thing centerpiece at the top for Tuesday’s lottery winner, no Anthony Davis or LeBron James with certain superstardom in his future. Similar to last year’s draft with LaMelo Ball, James Wiseman and Anthony Edwards, teams will need to dive in and study a few different players. The consensus top 2021 prospects are Oklahoma State’s Cade Cunningham and USC’s Evan Mobley.

From my perspective, this draft is also a bit different in terms of how its depth shakes out. I’d be really happy to have a pick in the top nine, or something in the mid-20s. However, the depth of this group sort of craters after the top nine picks, leaving a lot of speculative-type selections in the teens, or non-speculative selections on near-certain role players. The 20s and 30s offer less risk in a way, as there are a number of players worth taking a flier on in this part of my board. The fail rate is high enough that it’s not a big worry if they don’t pan out.

For now, lets go back to my basic rule that I introduced eight months ago: 20 players. My mission is to try to find the 20 guys in this draft that I think will make it, since that’s usually the number of rotation-caliber players each draft produces. (No, I’m not counting the “rotation” minutes gifted to every lottery pick, I mean players that actually stick around and help).

I do need to confess I actually cheated a bit. Last year I expanded that list to include three sleepers, and I’m pretty happy that Desmond Bane was one of them (we’ll wait to see how Malachi Flynn and Elijah Hugest turn out). I did the same thing this year.

I’ll get to the rest of my draft board, spots 24 through 70, in a few weeks, once we know who is actually staying in this draft and who isn’t. But with the lottery coming up and virtually all the top-tier talent making their intentions to stay in the draft known, I can share the top of my board now.

1. Cade Cunningham, SG/SF, Oklahoma State, Freshman

The default that Cunningham is the best player in this draft has perhaps not been challenged enough. I ended up with him No. 1 as well, but reasonable people can disagree among the top four players on my board.

Ultimately, the best reason to pick Cunningham is that his elite shooting gives him the highest floor of any player in the draft. Cunningham shot 40.0% from 3-point range and 84.6% from the line, and many of those 3s were tough looks off the dribble. His catch-and-shoots look perfect, and he has the size to shoot over any closeout. That perimeter skill set, from a big wing who can handle and pass, makes Khris Middleton-type outcomes seem reasonably likely.

Finding big wings with skill of any stripe is also the most difficult thing for any NBA team to pull off. These players are massively valuable, as the playoffs once again show us, and should be the priority of any team’s draft process.

Where I push back is the idea that Cunningham can be “The Man,” the guy you give the keys to the offense on Day 1 and never look back. For me he’s much more of a secondary creator who can weaponize his shooting threat rather than the guy you play on the ball for 60 trips a game.

In particular, Cunningham’s game off the bounce strikes me as wildly overrated. He has a loose handle that gets away from him fairly often, particularly with his left hand. He also constantly forces passes, and rarely makes deliveries that make you go “ooh!” (They’re in there if you look hard enough, but man there’s a lot of chaff in between the wheat). He can throw crosscourt passes with his right hand but they’re not laser beams; the defense has a chance to recover.

Between the lost dribbles and wayward passes, Cunningham had a sky-high turnover rate for a prospect of this magnitude (or any prospect, really), giving it away 7.0 times per 100, and a meh assist rate of 5.0 per 100. In fairness, we should allow some for context: The surrounding roster was not exactly an offensive juggernaut and was particularly deficient in 3-point shooting, limiting Cunningham’s operating space and assist options.

As a scoring threat on the ball, he really struggled to get by defenders. Attempts to blow by bigs on switches often ended with him dribbling straight into a defender’s chest, and he rarely got all the way to the basket. Overall he shot only 46.1% on 2s. Again, the limited spacing on this roster didn’t help. I like Cunningham a lot better if he starts with a half-step advantage or can leverage his shooting threat against a closing defender. Luka Doncic he ain’t.

Defensively, he’s good enough. He uses his length well and can slide his feet but he’s not a disruptor or somebody who anticipates for steals. He won’t be NBA All-Defense or anything, but he’ll be able to switch across positions and hold his own. Again, a floor as a high-level 3-and-D guy is pretty darned good. It’s just may not be what we’re used to for the top overall pick.

Cunningham is also a cool, unflappable customer with a penchant for big shots. He is clearly an NBA starter from Day 1, and the possibilities of elite shooting gives him Jayson Tatum upside. His inability to beat defenders off the dribble may not matter if he’s rising up for 30-footers against them.

Overall, he’s my pick here. But it’s not the home run some make it out to be, and I’m hoping the team drafting him has another playmaker.

2. Evan Mobley, PF/C, USC, Freshman

Even the way the game is going small, Mobley has an argument to be the top pick. His basic premise is that he can do most of the things perimeter guys can but he’s the size of a center. You can make an argument that Mobley is better at self-created shots inside the 3-point line than Cunningham is, and is also better at defending the perimeter. So we call Mobley a “big” and Cunningham a “wing,” but other than Cunningham’s shooting, Mobley is better at most of the wing stuff, too.

In 2021, however, a big has to be pretty darned good to make a case for himself as being more valuable than a wing with size. Surely there are exceptions – Nikola Jokic won the MVP award, and Joel Embiid was the East’s most dominant player this season — but the bar is higher for bigs.

Mobley is fortunately the right kind of big because it is going to be very hard to play him off the court in the playoffs. His skinny frame, skill set and defensive mobility almost immediately conjure images of Chris Bosh. In particular, some of his defensive clips had me cackling, as guards embarrassed themselves trying to take him off the bounce. He’s great at keeping his feet moving and using his length to contest shots when picking up guards in switches.

That said, you wish Mobley was better at some of the things that actually involve being big. He’s not notably good at posting up, owing in part to his very slender frame. His Rebound Rate was unimpressive and he gets pushed around near the basket, where his thin frame becomes a liability. Statistically he’s a good but not great shot-blocker, although that partly results from how often he had to defend on the perimeter. His motor doesn’t always run super-hot, either.

Offensively, Mobley hints at upside in all kinds of directions but doesn’t have one overwhelming skill at the moment. As noted above, he’s pretty good when he can attack off the bounce, even against guards. He can put the ball on the floor, score off the dribble as a driver from the free-throw area and finish near the cup. He shows rudiments of stretch ability, making 12 3-pointers on the season and shooting 69.4% from the line, and his form suggests he can at least become a break-even proposition as a shooter.

Mobley has All-Star upside, with shades of Bosh and Pau Gasol in his game, but he has work ahead of him to get there.

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% 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 can finish over any guard at 6-foot-9, 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, with the size to check interior players but 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 is 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’s 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’s 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 legitimately 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 this 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 3, 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

A medium-risk, high-reward type pick, Green is a skinny, athletic shooting guard with blast-off quickness and elite leaping ability. You can’t teach this stuff, and it’s why he’s a certain high lottery pick. He’s the one guy who made the most “holy ****” plays in this draft, with fast-twitch hops reminiscent of Zach LaVine.

Green got off to a slow start in the G League but really picked up his play toward the end, figuring out how to take advantage of his speed and leaping ability to get to the rim. His weaknesses right now are all skill-based. He has to play off the ball because his handle isn’t ever advanced; he frequently lost his dribble making relatively basic moves in pick-and-roll. His shooting is decent but hardly exceptional, and he relies too much on step-back 3s because he lacks advanced maneuvers with the rock. As a passer, he’s capable of basic reads but that part of his game is still coming around. He’s not selfish; he just doesn’t have the whole picture yet.

He is decent defensively but not exceptional. Green should be able to draft into passing lines more often than he does, and his first slide actually looks slow – it’s surprising how often he was beaten off the dribble. However, he competed, and he has the athleticism to surprise shooters with shot challenges.

Green is only 19 and was a good but not great G League player last season, so we’re talking about a developmental pick here. But his ceiling is high enough to make it worthwhile.

6. Jalen Suggs, PG, Gonzaga, Freshman

Suggs reminds me of Jason Kidd in a lot of ways, although the passing is more solid than spectacular. He has pretty good size for a point guard and great end-to-end speed, plus he has absolutely tremendous anticipation at the defensive end. Suggs reads the game almost like defensive back, closing on the ball with speed to intercept passes. His feet are only average on the ball and he can get caught reaching, but overall he projects as a tough defender.

Offensively, his pace in transition is an obvious benefit that helps grease the way to easy baskets, but his halfcourt game remains a work in progress. Suggs shot 33.7% from 3 and 75.4% from the line, so teams will dare him to prove he can knock down shots consistently. The good news is that Suggs has a quick release that he’s comfortable getting it off the dribble, and he shows pretty good footwork getting into pull-ups in the painted area on pivots and up-and-unders. He doesn’t need to improve his percentages that much to turn the shooting from a liability to a strength.

Bigger picture, the upside as an elite offensive player is maybe a bit limited by the shooting and the lack of elite pick-and-roll craft. That’s why Suggs is a bit lower on my board than some others. After my top five prospects, however, Suggs is the obvious pick due to his long-term starter potential and fairly high floor for such a young player.

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 halfcourt, 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 rarely screws up, resulting in a better than 2-1 assist-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

Kuminga is the next level of big wing shot-creator in this class. Right now he’s a good ways behind Cunningham and Barnes in terms of his ability to read the game and make plays for others, with a skill set more reminiscent of younger versions of Harrison Barnes or Andrew Wiggins.

In Kuminga’s G League stint, he showed the size and skill to dribble himself into pull-up 2s and occasionally make them. Unfortunately he also revealed an almost unslakable thirst for this particular shot and an iffy ability to generate better ones.

Kuminga was an ineffective passer and, while a good athlete, doesn’t have the blow-by gear or wiggle that would allow him generate easier opportunities than the ones for which he routinely settles. One area where he did seem very comfortable, however, was facing up a defender from the free throw line. From there he could get to the basket with one dribble and finish with his size.

Kuminga has the size and lateral quickness to be the multi-positional defender that teams crave (he’ll be at a disadvantage against the fastest guards, though who isn’t), but his instincts are miles behind. He also was a disappointingly poor rebounder for a player for this ilk. That said, he’s 6-foot-8 with some legit perimeter skill, and will be one of the youngest players in the draft with an October 2002 birthdate. (Yes, virtually every player in this draft was born this century. Sigh …. I know.)

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, as he is not a great shooter, and as a driver and finisher was much more effective operating in transition than in the halfcourt.

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 we had in Memphis, James Johnson; like his namesake, this Johnson can play as a big while operating as an on-ball creator on offense, but 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, with 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 plus 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

Similar to Kuminga, Giddey is 6-foot-8 with perimeter skills. Unlike Kuminga, he only exists in two dimensions. Yes, Giddey needs to pack on a bit of muscle, but his play in a physical professional league in Australia shows that he can be an impact player without looking like Hercules.

Again, big wings who can dribble and pass are the gold every scout seeks, which gives Giddey a solid boost up the list here. His upside scenarios are reminiscent of Toni Kukoc or Joe Ingles with a right hand. The reason he doesn’t go any higher, however, has to do with some of the limitations that could prove fail points in this development.

For starters, there is his shot. Giddey shot 29.3% from 3 and 69.1% from the line this season, and while he relied some on self-created 3s, the eye test backs up the numbers in this case. He shoots an awkward, elbow-out jumper flicked off his forehead, and he’s going to need that shot to open up the rest of his game. Giddey doesn’t have the burst to get to the cup on his own steam consistently and for that reason was an underwhelming scorer Down Under (10.8 points per game, exactly 50.0% on 2s).

His ability to guard on the perimeter is also a question, especially given his thin frame and limited vertical. Giddey wasn’t afraid to stick his nose in and rebound, however, with a 12.8% Rebound Rate in a pretty brutish league.

The reason to draft Giddey is for his passing. His ability to make deliveries with either hand at his age is pretty special; he just has to good enough at the other stuff that it’s worth putting him on the ball. Unlike the other prospects who have played in Australia, Giddey legitimately impacted winning as a teenager. He’ll also be nearly the youngest player in the draft, with an October 2002 birthdate.

The size, passing and youth make for a strong case. Relative the players above him, however, Giddey has two minuses – athleticism and shooting – and at least one of them needs to turn in his favor.

11. Jared Butler, PG/SG, Baylor, Junior

I’m a big fan of Butler, a butter-smooth guard with a sweet handle, long arms, good defensive anticipation and a money outside shot. Butler shot 41.6% on 3s on high volume, had a high assist rate for a combo guard, and shot 52.4% inside the arc while scoring at a high rate (31.0 points per 100). All the tools are there for a rotation-caliber combo guard with starter upside. While his teammate Davion Mitchell has gotten more of the praise recently, Butler is two years younger, bigger, had the greater offensive role and profiles as a better shooter.

Defensively, he might not be as insanely wired to cut off dribble penetration as Mitchell, but he has long arms that generate deflections and close up passing lanes. Baylor was a high-pressure team so all their steal rates are inflated, but his 4.2 swipes per 100 possessions in Big 12 play was the highest of any prospect in his draft cycle.

Butler doesn’t offer elite upside because his size and athleticism are pretty unremarkable and he was already a junior, though he might have the best handle of any player in the draft and his offensive game is exceptionally well-rounded. I have a hard time seeing how he fails.

However, based on background teams have done, there is a concern about what Butler’s physical will turn up at the Draft Combine this week. We’ll likely know more about that after teams dissect the information in a few weeks. But if Butler gets a clean bill from the doctors, it’s hard for me to avoid putting him in the lottery.

12. Corey Kispert, SF, Gonzaga, Senior

Holy crap, a senior!

We’re getting into a different strata of player here, because Kispert has near-zero star equity. That said, big wings who can shoot are one of the most valuable player archetypes, and Kispert checks all the boxes for this species. While there remains a pretty big variance between this pick turning out to be more like Doug McDermott (meh) or more like Joe Harris (wahoowa!!), Kispert offers near-certain rotation caliber shooting at the expense of the upside you’d usually want at this stage of the late lottery. Kispert is also 22, which makes him a fossil relative to the other players available here.

Defensively, Kispert looked pretty solid for a player of this ilk. He’s not a disruptor but his strength is an underrated asset; allowing him to match up with some 4s and hold his own against post-ups. On the perimeter, he relies on his length against smalls and will concede space and some jump shots, however he moves his feet to cut off driving lanes and is very good at using verticality. I don’t think he’ll have a target on his back.

We should also talk about some of the upside here as a scorer. I realize Gonzaga didn’t play a tough schedule, but Kispert’s game wasn’t just 3s. He scored 33.0 points per 100 and shot 64% inside the arc; he’s actually a really good finisher off straight-line drives because of his size and strength, and pretty good in transition, too. He weaponized that with his 3-point threat; he hit 44.0% and 43.8% from 3 his final two seasons at Gonzaga, so you better close out on him hard.

One thing I didn’t like about Kispert was his low release point. I don’t think he’s the type of guy who’s going to run away from his defense and come off two pin screens wheeling and dealing; he’s better off spotting up away from the play. But he has the tools to be an elite weak-side offensive player.

13. James Bouknight, SG, Connecticut, Sophomore

Pronounced “Bucket.” Okay, it’s not, but it should be. He’s a bit undersized for a shooting guard and a bit greedy for a point, but Bouknight’s ability to get this own shot stands out in this class.

Bouknight averaged an eye-popping 39.3 points per 100 possessions in nine Big East games as a sophomore at UConn this season, despite a midseason injury that seemed to affect his shooting once he came back. He can take it to the cup and finish with long strides and length (54.5% on 2s in Big East with a high free throw rate), plus he gets off the floor on his jumper and is comfortable shooting pull-ups off the dribble.

That doesn’t make him wart-free. You’d like to see more consistency in his perimeter stroke (29.3% from 3 this year, 32.0% career, although he’s an 80% foul shooter); opponents may just go under screens on him and dare him to bomb way. Bouknight also needs to increase his feel as a passer if he wants to play a prominent on-ball role. His rate of 3.2 assists per 100 was unacceptable for a high-volume guard.

Bouknight needs to show a bit more verve defensively. He shows good lateral quickness, has decent length and competes when he’s guarding on the ball, but he also chills out off the ball and doesn’t anticipate plays. He also needs to build up his skinny frame, as opposing 2s will likely try to take him on the block. One encouraging sign: He does rebound, with 10.2 boards per 100 in Big East play.

The value proposition here is that high-level shot creation still matters. Bouknight has a lot of Jordan Clarkson in him, both for good and bad, but it’s not hard to imagine him becoming an annual Sixth Man winner.

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

My rule of thumb, as ever: Guys who play in high-level European leagues as teenagers and hold their own don’t fail. Garuba played a total of 86 games (!) for Real Madrid this year as a rotation big at the age of 18, showed fairly steady improvement as the year went on and probably can be an NBA-caliber defender from Day 1 as either a 4 or a smallball 5.

However, I can’t put him any higher than this because of the potential limitations on the offensive side. He’s a good athlete but not a freak, and he’s undersized at the 5. So where is his advantage? At 6-foot-8 without elite shot-blocking or rebounding numbers on his resume, he’s going to have a hard time carving out a role as a full-time center even in a downsized NBA. Adding enough skill to play some minutes next to a true 5 is going to be his pathway to becoming a starting-caliber player.

On that front, Garuba remains a work in progress. He flies up and down the court in transition and has started to steady his 3-point shot from the corners (31.6% this year). He also actually shows some ball skills when his team lets him paint outside the lines. That said, Garuba isn’t a great finisher around the basket.

Ultimately, I see a potential comparison for Garuba as a bigger version of Toronto’s OG Anunoby. He can guard on the perimeter, and his switchability means he won’t get played off the floor. At least on defense. He needs the shooting to come around to have starter value, and that’s why he’s just outside the lottery on my board.

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 *** to play against.

Mitchell was also one of the country’s most improved players at the offensive end. He shot 44.7% 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% 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% from the line, and finished his career at 65.7%. Even comparing Usage Rates this year, Butler had far more of the offense on his shoulders than Mitchell. 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

I originally had McBride in my “sleepers” area, but when I went back to tape I kept saying, “this guy is good.” Not that I should be surprised. Every year, the Big 12 is guaranteed to produce at least one high-character guy who plays his tuckus off and knows what he’s doing and ends up having a 10-year career even though he wasn’t drafted highly and doesn’t have elite athleticism. Last year it was Desmond Bane. This year McBride is that guy.

Let’s start on the downside. McBride is 6-foot-2 and plays with more of a shooting guard’s instincts. He doesn’t get all the way to the rim as often as you’d like for a point guard and settles for a ton of pull-up jumpers, resulting in a disappointing 43.9% mark on 2s – a number that sank to just 40.8% in Big 12 play. That’s indicative of some limitations.

But the good stuff that offsets it is so plentiful. One reason he depends on pull-ups is that he’s a good shooter with a really comfortable stroke off the dribble, one that should easily translate into off-the-dribble 3s coming off pick-and-roll screens as a pro. McBride shot disappointingly few 3s, actually, but made 41.4% of them and hit 81.5% from the line.

And then there’s the defense. McBride’s feet can be heavy at times, but he plays with tremendous effort and uses his long arms as a weapon, nabbing 3.1 steals per 100 possessions in Big 12 play. He’s not content to ease off ballhandlers, instead going up into the dribbler and betting that his hands and feet will be enough. He’s also surprisingly quick rising up and contesting shots. Despite the high-pressure style, McBride also had an extremely low foul rate: just 2.8 per 100 possessions, nearly the lowest of any prospect, and certainly the lowest of anyone who was actually trying.

His package screams rotation guard, with a high-character background that makes you more confident he can maximize whatever his upside is. McBride has been pegged in the 30s and 40s for most of this draft cycle and was rumored to still be pondering a return to school, but I still wonder if I have him too low here.

18. Keon Johnson, SG, Tennessee, Freshman

Most projections have him in the lottery, but I can’t quite get as excited about Johnson as my peers. I understand the basic premise: After the sure things are off the board, maybe the next-best move is to draft an electric athlete who only recently turned 19 and see what happens. Johnson is a high-flier who might have the best YouTube dunk clips of any prospect and seems to have decent lateral mobility.

But man, there are warts a plenty here. He’s 6-foot-5 but often looked more like an undersized power forward than a shooting guard. His offense consisted mainly of righ-hand dribbles into mid-range pull-ups that went in just often enough to keep shooting them, and for a guy with pogo hops his rates of rebounds and blocks were a crushing disappointment. Bizarrely, Johnson couldn’t shoot a pull-up going to his left; he had to stop and spin 270 degrees back to his right to launch.

Johnson isn’t a 3-point threat (27.1% from 3 on low volume and 70.2% from the line), and while you wouldn’t describe his shot as broken, he’s a long way from being an even average perimeter weapon. The best thing you could say about his jumper is that he gets into it easily off the dribble and can elevate and release it over nearly anybody. A lot of times you wish he couldn’t.

It’s possible being away from a constipated Tennessee offense that seemed intent on strangling itself will give Johnson more opportunities to shine. It’s also possible a lower-usage role (his 26.8% Usage Rate was pretty high for a player of this ilk) would take better advantage of his skill set.

And there is some upside here. As an on-ball player, Johnson was able to find open men as a passer and make some genuinely good reads in pick-and-roll. His handle, however, is as basic as they come. He rarely got all the way to the rim and operated almost entirely in straight lines. He also showed some real shortcomings as a finisher, with poor balance and body control once he got moving toward the basket and a need to jump off two feet.

In this draft there are 15 other players like this. Prospects we describe as “young and a good athlete but about the basketball …”. Of those, Johnson is the best at actual basketball and probably the best athlete, too. There’s a decent chance he fails, but there’s also a right tail where he turns into DeMar DeRozan.

19. Chris Duarte, SG/SF, Oregon, Senior

Duarte isn’t for everyone, as he will be 24 years old when training camp opens. History tells us drafting old guys has often turned out badly, and that there is a lot less upside in picking Duarte versus picking players who are as much as a half decade younger.

That said, this is where the selling proposition on Duarte looks reasonable. He is an NBA rotation wing right now, and may even be a starter. There is no development curve, no having to use our imagination to color in lines that might not be there.

Duarte is a good shooter (42.4% from 3 on high volume) and a deft operator around the rim who shot a staggering 63.1% on 2s, even in a high-volume role that saw him average 31.3 points per 100 in conference. He handles the ball well enough to be a secondary operator, finishing with a positive assist-to-turnover ratio, and can guard 2s and 3s. He also anticipates well off the ball, with a stellar 3.3 per 100 steal rate in Pac 12 play).

That combination likely yields a relatively unsexy package of a plus backup wing who can maybe start, but think of this as a free agent move. By nabbing Duarte outside the lottery, a team is basically getting four years of a $10 million player on a $3 million contract for four years. The tradeoff is that they give up on the improbable but still theoretically possible opportunity to pick a teenager and wind up with a $30 million player a few years down the road.

20. Jaden Springer, PG/SG, Tennessee, Freshman

I went back and forth several times on Springer, but ultimately I lean toward betting on him for two reasons. First, his birth certificate. Springs won’t turn 19 until September, so he still has time on his side to push his development forward.

The other reason to bet on him is his defense. Whatever you think of his offensive game, the defense was legit. Springer is a bit short for a shooting guard and a bit slow for a point guard, but he’s strong, competes, moves his feet, and keeps his hands active. He’ll need that kind of feistiness and attention to make it at the next level because he’s not a superior athlete, though the defense should buy him time for the offense to come around.

As for the offense … the eye test wasn’t as bullish as the stats. Springer made 43.5% of his 3s, but it was on extremely low volume for a guard (just 46 all year) and his jumper appears to have a slight hitch. (This is where seeing games in person would have been in helpful, but c’est la …). Instead, he is hugely reliant on pull-up 2s that he may have a hard time getting to against NBA defenses.

Springer is strong enough to body himself some space for his shot at times, and he does elevate pretty well and have a high release point, but at 6-4 without crazy hops, it’s a tough shot to count on. More reliably, perhaps, is drawing fouls, which he also did at a high rate, and his free-throw shooting (81.0%) offers some hope for his overall shooting.

No matter what, he’ll need to cut down on the turnovers that plagued him as a freshman; as with Johnson above, playing in a real offense might help.

Three sleepers

These guys aren’t getting lottery buzz, or anything like it, but I’m much higher on all three and interested to see where their draft stock heads as the big day draws closer.

21. Roko Prkacin, PF, KK Ciboria

History says teams undervalue youth in the draft. So let’s talk about the youngest player in the draft, Prkacin, who won’t turn 19 until Thanksgiving weekend.

That age is irrelevant unless he can play, obviously, but Prkacin had a good year overseas and shows the physical tools to do more as he gets older. Prkacin is 6-foot-9 with square shoulders and long arms, and rebounded like a center despite playing on the perimeter in the admittedly not-quite-elite Adriatic League. He could end up being a 5 or at least a 4/5 half a decade down the road. But he also had a solid steal rate for this size, and the eye test backs up the idea that he can move.

Offensively, he has a lot of the basic elements and now needs to refine them. His form on 3s still needs tightening but he managed to make 35.0% of his 160 attempts across competitions this year. A 65.0% mark at the line is a worrisome countertrend. He can handle the ball for his size, however, and shows an unusual knack for runners and floaters.

Prkacin has the size and mobility to be a good defender, too, but he still shows some confusion defending in pick-and-roll and switching situations. Again, cut him some slack: He was 17 when the season started.

Prakcin’s lack of draft buzz oddly makes him an even better choice; late draft picks are much more acceptably stashed overseas, which would probably be the best development pathway for him in the short term.

22. Neemias Queta, C, Utah State, Junior

My membership in the Neemias Queta fan club is already well established so I won’t go too deep down the rabbit hole this time. Suffice to say that despite my general misgivings about drafting centers, I think the 7-foot Queta can offer a lot of value and some relative upside.

Queta still has to get better defending away from the basket, and that’s a concern for any big man in today’s NBA. The Aggies always played him in a deep drop so he didn’t get many chances to show perimeter quickness, but his rare forays away from the charge circle weren’t tragic. He’s a little slow laterally but not as bad as some other 5s getting more draft hype, plus he showed a real ability to close down space and block shots from behind at the basket.

Offensively, Queta added something to his game every year at Utah State and by the end was a legitimately good passer who also had a variety of 1-on-1 moves to score on the block. Utah State’s plodding pace masked just how effective he was: Queta averaged 30 points and 6 assists per 100 possessions in Mountain West play. For comparison, Cade Cunningham averaged 31 and 5.

This train is still going up. Queta arrived at Utah State as a raw freshman from Portugal and has added bits and pieces to his game since. His skill level can still go forward from here, but he’ll always be 7-feet tall.

23. Herb Jones, SF/PF, Alabama, Senior

Finally, we have Jones, the last guy in this draft that I’d at least feel somewhat comfortable betting on before the real dart-tossing begins. So-called “shutdown corners” aren’t quite as valuable now in the switch-everything era as they were when he could just sick Tony Allen on an opponent’s top scorer and call it a day. That said, defense still matters, and Jones is really good at it. At 6-foot-8 with good feet, piliferous hands and a knack for drawing charges, Jones might be the best perimeter defender in this draft aside from Barnes. As with Barnes, his size and dexterity make him a true defensive chameleon. Jones is capable of checking the other team’s point guard but also line up as a smallball 5 in the right matchup.

As for the offense, well … that’s why he’s 23. It’s possible Jones is just too tragic on offense to hold down a rotation spot. That said, he’s improved quite a bit. Jones even made 20 3s this season – more than in his first three seasons combined – and improved his handle and decisions enough to finish with a positive assist-to-turnover mark. In a more wide-open NBA floor, Jones’s slashing and size to finish at the basket could also reap some rewards.

Jones is one of the few upperclassmen that pack some upside in the form of a still-developing offensive game. But his defense provides a relatively sure thing to at least give some value. He’s projected for the second round now, but I’d grab him earlier.
Click to expand...

Didn't think I'd find somebody that loves Scottie Barnes more than me :lol:
 
I would hate hate hate to be a general manager in this draft.

You know this is the draft where someone totally random will end up as the best player.



watch Alperen Sengun or someone win the MVP in 2030
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Remember 2024 thread
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
1995
1995
HIM
|| DFS Player Props Thread || Prize Picks - Underdog - etc. ||
4 5 6
Replies
140
Views
5K
addict4sneakers
addict4sneakers

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom