2025 NBA Draft Thread

[addict4sneakers]

Scoot playing pro ball for 2 years before playing in the league looks like the absolute right choice. The Thompson brothers should probably jump ship assuming they can contractually. No excuses for their shooting numbers.

 

[VARNELL HILL]

I think Whitehead will end up going 3-5 when that time rolls around.

 

[Arthur Shelby]

Kel'el Ware >> Dereck Lively ii

The gap getting closer but scouts haven't fully woke up yet

 

[dacomeup]

I think Whitehead will end up going 3-5 when that time rolls around.

That def looked way too low for him. He’s a freak athlete. Not taking Lively on his own team over him

 

[pmatic]

 

[dacomeup]

Someone is going to take this kid Top 5

 

[ballinsam23]

I’ve come around on Sharpe. Take him top 5. Everything I’m reading and watching shows he can play. If his biggest red flag is that he takes plays off or doesn’t look engaged at all times, yet is the best player on the court, I’m taking that player.

 

[B Sox]

I’ve come around on Sharpe. Take him top 5. Everything I’m reading and watching shows he can play. If his biggest red flag is that he takes plays off or doesn’t look engaged at all times, yet is the best player on the court, I’m taking that player.

BUT THE RISK!!

 

[ballinsam23]

BUT THE RISK!!

Still a risk , but in this draft it’s worth it.

 

[HOU$TON]

I’d rather take the risk on sharpe at #5 than settling for Keegan Murray/AJ griffin

 

[Coupé It]

Bruh…

 

[pmatic]

 

[pmatic]

 

[Arthur Shelby]

 

[HOU$TON]

 

[Vincent Van Goat]

The Thompson brothers are something else

Sharpe is doing himself a favor by declaring for this class. The 2023 gonna have hella talent, feel like gonna be much more hyped than 2022

 

[pmatic]

Spoiler

Which current NBA players outperformed or underperformed draft experts' projections?

It should go without saying that the evaluation of NBA prospects is something less than an exact science. A number of factors can cause a player to either outperform or underperform relative to their NBA projection, and each of the league's 30 teams and their increasingly robust scouting and analytics staffs understand that this notion comes with the territory.

The unknown of future health is always a variable, while factors ranging from "late bloomer" status to "bad NBA team fit" issues to "combine warrior" realities can change the trajectory of a player's pro career immeasurably. ESPN's team of Jonathan Givony, Mike Schmitz and Kevin Pelton all conduct an exhaustive degree of evaluation and/or data analysis to help mitigate those unknowns -- but any NBA analyst worth their salt will tell you there are no guarantees. And any credible NBA draft analyst must own the misses. With that in mind, Givony, Schmitz and Pelton all identified recent NBA draft picks about whom they were wrong, laying out the factors that led to the errant projections -- both on the positive and negative sides of the ledger:

Rated too low

Jalen Brunson | 2018 draft: No. 33 (Dallas Mavericks)

Everything about Brunson's résumé leading up to the 2018 draft screamed stardom. He was a five-star recruit after leading the Nike EYBL in assists and winning the MVP of the FIBA U19 World Cup (over Jayson Tatum), one of two gold medals he won with USA Basketball. He won two national championships at Villanova and was named the NCAA's National Player of the Year and Big East Player of the Year. He was an ultra-efficient scorer (60% 2P%, 41% 3P%) who played strong defense and almost never turned the ball over. But we didn't believe it, and neither did NBA teams judging by the fact that Brunson fell to the second round.

Brunson's arms weren't very long. He was only 6-foot-1. He had a pudgy frame. He was too slow. He didn't have a very explosive first step. He didn't show much wiggle with the ball. He played a bully-ball-style power game that wasn't all that aesthetically pleasing to watch. He had only seven dunks and made seven floaters in 116 college games. Analytics models hated the fact that he posted only one block in his entire college career, and very few rebounds and steals.

Would he be able to stay in front of NBA point guards with a 6-3 wingspan, a bad body and lack of lateral quickness? So much of his offense came in the post -- could he get by anyone in the NBA? Were his assist numbers mostly a product of Villanova's system? How would any of it translate, and if it didn't, how much would he actually improve considering he'd turn 22 two months after the draft?

It all turned out to be utter nonsense, which became apparent very quickly in the NBA, where Brunson became a starter and major contributor as a rookie, despite being "already" 22. Brunson continued to improve in each of his four seasons in the NBA thus far, and is currently in the midst of a stellar playoffs. He kept the Mavs afloat with Luka Doncic out because of injury in the first round, scoring 41 points in one game against Utah, and has played a huge role in Dallas tying the conference semifinal series with Phoenix at 2-2.

Brunson has improved his body to become one of the most efficient pick-and-roll guards in the league, his floater is elite, and he's one of the best off-the-dribble shooters in the NBA. His ability to play on or off the ball alongside Doncic is a huge key to the Mavs' success. While he's still not the most explosive guard around -- his four total dunks this season rank 350th in the NBA, per Synergy -- he gets where he wants on the floor thanks to his handle, pace and strength, finishes extremely well around the basket, and more than holds his own defensively, especially off the ball.

The lesson we should learn from Brunson's misevaluation as a draft prospect? Don't dismiss ultraproductive, ultraconfident winners like him so easily, especially those who are deadeye off-the-dribble shooters like he was in college. -- Givony

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander | 2018 draft: No. 11 (Charlotte Hornets)

I had Gilgeous-Alexander 14th in my subjective rankings ahead of the 2018 draft, three spots lower than he was actually taken and four spots lower than SGA ranked among all players under 25 in our most recent rankings with Mike and Bobby Marks.

Although Gilgeous-Alexander's stats in his one season at Kentucky were certainly not bad, neither did they scream future star. He ranked 20th in my consensus projections and 37th in the stats-only version. However, a Wildcats team with limited floor spacing (Kevin Knox was the only UK starter to make even one 3-pointer per game and frontcourt starters Nick Richards and P.J. Washington combined to make just five 3s) didn't allow SGA to take full advantage of his quickness and playmaking.

This was a case in which Jonathan and Mike had a clear advantage thanks to scouting Gilgeous-Alexander back to the youth level. Mike was especially high on SGA, and it took me about five minutes watching him in a different setting at NBA summer league to see why. Gilgeous-Alexander was instantly successful as a rookie on a competitive LA Clippers team and now looks like a future star for the Oklahoma City Thunder.

Although the challenge of limited floor spacing for super-quick guards is a universal one in college hoops, it's one that seems especially important to understand when scouting perimeter prospects from Kentucky -- many of whom have outperformed their projections in the pros. -- Pelton

Trae Young | 2018 draft: No. 5 (Dallas Mavericks -- dealt to Atlanta Hawks)

Young has been my biggest scouting miss to date. It's not that I didn't think he'd be a productive NBA player, but I surely didn't see him ranking sixth in the NBA in scoring and second in assists on a playoff team at just 23 years old, one year removed from an Eastern Conference semifinal run. I preferred fiery Alabama guard Collin Sexton to Oklahoma's Young leading up to the 2018 NBA draft, projecting Sexton as a two-way contributor, and had concerns about the Sooners star's lack of defensive impact and ball-dominant style. Although Sexton was no slouch in his third NBA season prior to dealing with injuries in Year 4, that was clearly an inaccurate forecast and one that I think about quite often when evaluating the next crop of prospects.

Even after lighting college basketball on fire with deep 3s and one-handed dimes, Young had no shortage of skeptics. And it is still valid to question if Young can be the centerpiece of a championship-caliber team, especially when you look at the level of defensive versatility necessary to make a deep playoff run -- see Boston Celtics. The Miami Heat threw the kitchen sink at Young, limiting him to 15.4 points, 6.0 assists and 6.0 turnovers through 5 games, as he looked worn down from the length, physicality and aggression. The Hawks also ranked 26th in defensive rating this season. But even with those pre-draft questions still slightly lingering in some corners of the NBA, Young is clearly far better than I anticipated, as his supreme skill level, never-ending confidence and ability to spray the ball all over the floor to open teammates should have him in the All-Star conversation every season despite lacking the size and length scouts traditionally look for in a modern lead guard.

So how do we avoid this mistake moving forward? Some prospects are simply so special offensively that you're willing to live with some of the defensive mistakes. Among those special talents, those who can really facilitate and keep their teammates happy lessen the blow on defense and make the swing worth taking in the draft.

Although he plays a completely different position and physical profile, I think about Trae Young in comparison to Duke star Paolo Banchero, another unique offensive talent with the ability to create offense at 6-foot-10, 250 pounds like no one else in this draft. The fact that Banchero can really pass on the move unlike any of the other top-pick contenders will allow the team that drafts him to play through him, and will keep his teammates relatively happy even if he misses a defensive rotation or two. While I still tend to favor two-way players with positional length in my projections, I've learned from Young that some offensive talents are worth the swing, especially when they have a few unique traits. -- Schmitz

Rated too high

Jarrett Culver | 2019 draft: No. 6 (Phoenix Suns)

It was difficult not to be enamored with the intriguing combination of versatility, youth and productivity Culver displayed as a sophomore, when he helped Texas Tech to the brink of a national championship. The Big 12 player of the year and a second-team All-American, Culver basically did everything for the Red Raiders, averaging 23.4 points, 8.1 rebounds, 4.7 assists and 1.8 steals per 40 minutes, pace adjusted, making him a darling of analytics models and traditional scouts alike. Culver was a 6-foot-7, long-armed, 20-year-old wing who defended all over the floor and shouldered significant playmaking responsibility for one of the best teams in college basketball, making him a lock as a top-10 pick on draft night.

But Culver has more or less fallen flat on his face in three NBA seasons, seeing his minutes drop every year to the point that he played in just 39 games this season, mostly coming in garbage time. He has appeared overwhelmed in those minutes, struggling to beat opponents off the dribble, looking incredibly indecisive when left open from the perimeter and hitting under 50% of his free throw attempts in three seasons, a sign of how damaged his confidence is at this point.

Looking back on Culver's film, there are some obvious red flags we can identify. He shot 12-of-78 (28%) from the field in four NCAA tournament games against high-major competition, including just 3-of-22 (14%) from beyond the arc. He noticeably struggled getting by opponents with his underwhelming first step and was extremely streaky when shooting from beyond the arc.

Texas Tech often slid Culver to power forward as games went on and used him in the mid-, high- and low-post to cut down on the amount of dribbles he'd need to collapse the defense and use his excellent playmaking ability to find open shooters or cutters in their motion offense. The Red Raiders won games off their No. 1-ranked defense, in which Culver played a major role, not their methodical offense, of which he was their unquestioned go-to guy.

Still, Culver flashed enough promise on offense to turn a blind eye to the fact that he lacked explosiveness to be a primary playmaking hub in the NBA, and was nowhere near a good enough shooter to be effective in an off-ball role (28% 3P in the NBA), sporting a slow release. He came up huge in many key moments, icing a Final Four win with a gutsy pull-up 3-pointer against Michigan, and scoring the would-be go-ahead basket in the national championship on an iso spin-move lefty layup out of a clear-out against De'Andre Hunter and Virginia. He dropped 25 points on No. 1 ranked Duke at Madison Square Garden, rising up for tough shot after tough shot off the bounce. He hit 45% of his 3-pointers in the first two months of the season and 38% as a freshman, causing many scouts to wave away his 25% 3-point shooting in his final 25 games as a sophomore as a product of Texas Tech's offense, as we already earmarked him for stardom by the time January rolled around.

Culver never played a minute of summer league as a draft-day trade took more than two weeks to get consummated. The nine-month pandemic layoff from March to December in 2020 probably didn't help matters, and he has had some minor injuries as well. Culver was too high of a draft pick to be sent to the G League to regain his confidence, and the Timberwolves ended up trading him to Memphis, one of the deepest teams in the NBA, which promptly declined his $8.1 million team option, making him an unrestricted free agent this summer. With his size, passing and defensive versatility, there are still outlines of a potential NBA player here if he can regain his confidence, especially considering he's only 23-years old, and there will surely be teams lining up this summer to offer him a small, team-friendly deal to see if he can rediscover the potential that made him such a high draft pick just three years ago.

Culver's struggles transitioning from college basketball stardom to functional NBA player are a reminder of how difficult the draft can be to project, and why context is so important in evaluating prospects. Had he not been the playmaking hub of an elite defensive team that instilled unlimited offensive confidence in him and allowed him to play to his strengths, he likely never becomes a top-10 pick. -- Givony

Sekou Doumbouya | 2019 draft: No. 15 (Detroit Pistons)

Doumbouya is an illustration of the limits of youth when it comes to potential, particularly for international prospects. Doumbouya rated third in my 2019 consensus projections, behind only top-two picks Zion Williamson and Ja Morant, in large part because Doumbouya wouldn't turn 19 for another six months. Doumbouya had played decently in the French Pro A league and EuroCup competition given his age, providing decent minutes off the bench, but he wasn't nearly as accomplished when he entered the league as the European prospects who have become stars in the NBA.

Although I wasn't subjectively quite as high on Doumbouya as the projections, putting him behind RJ Barrett and Darius Garland as well as Culver, I still had him ahead of the likes of Brandon Clarke, De'Andre Hunter and Tyler Herro. As those players are playing key roles in the playoffs, Doumbouya is out of the league entirely, having been traded by the Detroit Pistons to the Brooklyn Nets last summer in a salary-related move and subsequently waived. His time as a two-way player with the Los Angeles Lakers ended in March.

Still just 21, Doumbouya could eventually become an NBA contributor. However, he certainly wasn't a top-10 prospect like I thought three years ago. In the future, I'll want to see a little more proven performance before rating a prospect that high almost entirely on the basis of youth. -- Pelton

Deni Avdija | 2020 draft: No. 9 (Washington Wizards)

It's far too early to write the 21-year-old Avdija off after 136 career games. The fact that he has evolved into a versatile defender while playing all 82 games and shooting a career-best 76% from the free throw line last season is a major step in the right direction (that was a pre-draft concern for most of his skeptics when projecting his 3-point shooting). Avdija showed more glimpses of shot creation than ever toward the end of the regular season. Although I still project Avdija as an eventual starter on a playoff team, I personally had him third overall behind LaMelo Ball (first) and Anthony Edwards (second), just ahead of Tyrese Haliburton. I dubbed him the "steal of the draft" when the Wizards selected him ninth overall. In retrospect, I should have saved that line for Tyrese Maxey, whom I had in the top 10 and was selected 21st overall.

So, what are the biggest things I've learned from ranking Avdija that high? For one, I think it's important that you can identify at least one "NBA skill" when evaluating prospects. Of course, in today's positionless NBA you have to be able to do multiple things, but I always tell young players, "Why is the coach going to look down the end of the bench and put you in the game? What's your superpower that you do better than almost anyone on the team." While Avdija did a little of everything on both ends of the floor, pushing in transition, attacking downhill, making occasional 3s and showing off the potential to develop into a versatile defender, he didn't quite have one elite skill he could hang his hat on every night regardless of the opponent. On top of that, I've learned that potential top-three-caliber prospects generally need that sense of inner calm that allows them to take over games, along with the skill set to make shots off the dribble, if they're going to ultimately blossom into a wing creator like I projected Avdija to become. Avdija often played a little too sped up, which has helped him become a great defender but is also a reason it has taken time for him to slow down offensively. The shooting off the dribble was a bit of an adventure as well, and he's a career 31% from 3 so far.

As we identify an elite skill for the prospects toward the top of this draft, Chet Holmgren has his rim protection, Jabari Smith has his shooting, Banchero has his ball handling, Jaden Ivey has his speed and burst. While Keegan Murray is maybe a good-not-great shooter, he does have that inner calm to take over games. There are several projected lottery prospects, however, who don't quite have an elite skill, at least from an NBA perspective. On top of that, I've also learned how your brain can find comfort in prospects you've evaluated closely for a longer period. That was the case for Avdija, whom I had scouted in person arguably as much as any other prospect since I've been doing this. It's important to not equate all those evaluations with surefire future success. -- Schmitz

I'm usually pretty cautious myself, but the list below I felt pretty confident in only for them to go bust or boom in opposite directions.

Too high:
Derrick Williams
Justise Winslow
Noah Vonleh
Killian Hayes

Too low:
Jayson Tatum
Jaylen Brown
Brad Beal
Anthony Edwards

 

[ballinsam23]

I’m a sucker for passing and rim protection so I fell for Thabeet, Noel, Oden, Killian Hayes, etc.

I also assume every tweener will be a bust. Like the Derrick Williams, Michael Beasleys (even though a solid career, but not for a #2 pick), Winslow, etc. So I missed the Tatum pick big time.

 

[B Sox]

Thought Josh Jackson had all-star potential and would at worst be a solid starter in the league that can play defense and do a little bit of everything.

 

[pmatic]

JFC.

 

[HOU$TON]

 

[Arthur Shelby]

 

[pmatic]

 

[addict4sneakers]

 

[HOU$TON]