Spoiler Group 6: More role players 51. A.J. Lawson, SG, South Carolina, Junior Somebody will take a chance on Lawson because of his defense and athleticism. Lawson was clearly the best athlete on the floor at the G League elite camp and among the best in the combine, plus he shot well all week in Chicago. That may be an outlier – we’re talking about a 34.9 percent career marksman from 3 at South Carolina, one who also shot 69.7 percent from the line – but you’re not drafting him for the shooting. Lawson’s athleticism is his best selling point. He had a 33-inch no-step vert at the combine and ran a 2.98 sprint, the latter being the fastest at the combine. However, he measured with short arms (a 6-foot-6 ¾ wingspan for a player who stands 6-foot-5 ½ in socks). More importantly, there are the basketball games. His defensive clips are good, and he bolstered that with a high steal rate (2.6 per 100 in conference games), although oddly few blocks for a player of this ilk (just seven, total, over 52 games in his sophomore and junior seasons). Offensively, it remains to be seen if he can provide enough skill and playmaking. He scored at a high rate and shot 3s with particularly high frequency for somebody who wasn’t terribly accurate, but had a negative assist-to-turnover rate and only shot 42.3 percent on 2s in conference play. 52. Justin Champagnie, PF, Pitt, Sophomore A smart college player who was able to play much bigger than his 6-foot-6 height despite average athleticism, Champagnie may have a tough transition to the next level. For starters, he’s a 28.3 percent career 3-point shooter, which immediately puts his career on life support since he almost certainly has to play the wing as a pro. He doesn’t add much playmaking to that picture either, with just 2.6 dimes per 100 in ACC games despite a high-usage role. However, he has some real strengths. For starters, he’s a crazy-good rebounder for his size, despite modest leaping ability and average length. Champagnie pulled down 17.8 boards per 100 in ACC games, which would be good for a center and is absolutely phenomenal for a wing. He has great instincts for getting his hands on balls defensively and is able to do it without fouling at a high rate. While you’d like to see more overall defensive impact from him and a bit more juice as an on-ball defender, his sticky fingers are helpful. Offensively, he draws fouls and sneaks his way to enough buckets off cuts, putbacks and other random plays that he’s able to score without being a great 1-on-1 player. How all this translates is still a major question, but he was able to play his game at the combine. He still probably has to jump another level as a shooter to make it as a rotation player, but he’s at least interesting. 53. David Johnson, SG, Louisville, Sophomore Johnson had lottery buzz at the start of the season on the heels of a pretty interesting freshman season where he put up huge per-minute stats but massive turnover rates and horrific shooting splits. All those extremes softened in his sophomore year, but the overall package left over wasn’t that exciting. Johnson rebounds well for a guard and has shown playmaking ability but remains a wild ride when he puts it on the floor (5.5 turnovers per 100 after averaging 7.0 as a freshman), plus he shot poorly inside the arc (42.6 percent for the season), and didn’t draw many fouls. The best thing about his season was the 3-point shooting, which he pushed to 38.6 percent after a woeful 21.7 percent freshman mark, but Johnson is a career 65.0 percent shooter from the line and the 19-game sample isn’t huge. Smart teams will take his 3-point numbers with an entire pillar of salt. Defensively, Johnson wasn’t good. Watching him on tape, I was shocked how heavy his feet seemed – Louisville would try to hide him on 3s and 4s, and he’d get beat off the dribble even while giving considerable cushion. At 6-foot-3 ¼ in socks, he has to check 2s and 3s at the pros (a giant 6-foot-10 ½ wingspan helps), and based on the tape I’m not sure he can do it. 54. Quentin Grimes, SG, Houston, Junior Grimes boosted his stock with two strong games at the draft combine, coming off a year where he very quietly led Houston to a 28-4 season and a Final Four berth. He is an odd confluence of strengths and shortcomings, a let-it-rip 3-point shooter who is also a plus rebounder and can defend some, but one with very little playmaking savvy and some pretty scary numbers shooting inside the arc. He shot 39.8 percent on 2s in the AAC – yikes! – and had just a 1-to-1 assist-to-turnover rate for this college career. Also, his long-range shooting remains a bit questionable. Yes, he made 38.9 percent this season on crazy-high volume (15.4 attempts per 100), but he also shot 64.7 percent from the line for his college career and hadn’t shot nearly this well from 3 before this season. Overall, looking at the whole package and not overreacting to one particularly strong game the second day of the combine, I think Grimes has back-end rotation upside if the shooting is real and the playmaking comes around. 55. Joel Ayayi, SG, Gonzaga, Junior Ayayi is a tough eval for scouts because he played off the ball so much, operating as a fourth option for a loaded Gonzaga team. Most upperclassman fourth options in college basketball aren’t worth scouting for the pros, but the Zags had so much talent that Ayayi is an exception. With Ayayi’s Usage Rate of just 16.1 percent while playing the guard position, teams really need to bear down on what he can and can’t do at the next level. One thing he certainly can do is rebound, despite being listed at just 6-foot-5, 180 pounds (he did not participate in the combine). Ayayi pulled down 12.0 boards per 100 possessions in his three college seasons and turned many of them into easy put-backs; he’s a high-energy runner and cutter who found himself enough layups to shoot an absurd 68.3 percent inside the arc. Some of that owes to the strength of the team around him, but in any context that’s impressive. As for the rest of his offense, it gets sketchier. Ayayi shot 36.0 percent from 3 on low volume and 77.6 percent from the line over his college career, so he has to prove he can be a reliable perimeter weapon. As a playmaker, he didn’t turn the ball over, but rarely made incisive passes or broke down defenders. Finally, there’s the defense. Ayayi can be an energetic pest at times off the ball, but on the ball his clips are pretty bad. He’s thin, doesn’t seem to slide well laterally, and overall just didn’t offer a ton of resistance. There are scenarios where he breaks through as an energy guy who feasts on high-percentage shots, but he’ll need the D to come around. 56. Chris Smith, PF, UCLA, Senior Smith missed nearly the entire year after tearing his ACL, but scouts haven’t forgotten about him. A 6-foot-9 power forward who can get a bit out of control. Smith nonetheless has some shot creation talent that could perhaps be exploited better at the next level. Despite his size, he has some first-step quickness to him that lets him get to the basket and finish, and his shooting started to come around in his junior year after he was a walking brick his first two seasons in Westwood. Again, at this point in the draft, we’re dealing with odds. Smith could easily end up being too out of control to be redeemable, or his shot too unsteady. But there is something here to build on.
Spoiler Group 7: Overseas stash guys 57. Yoan Makoundou, C, Cholet How do you say “Greg Brown” in French? Makoundou had some awesome highlights, but is relatively new to organized basketball and his game is raw as sushi. There is some obvious long-term upside here – he’s long, athletic and can jump – but he just has no idea how to play right now, and even some of the things you might expect an athletic, toolsy guy to master quickly (rebounding, shot-blocking) haven’t completely clicked for him. Nonetheless, he has a passport, and that is an advantage in the second round. A team that drafts him could leave Makoundou overseas for however long it wants until he develops … or, if he never develops, just include his rights in trades for the next two decades as the Ricky Sanchez of a new generation. 58. Juhann Begarin, SG, Paris Basketball Begarin is nothing to write home about at the moment, but is one of the youngest players in the draft (born August 2002) and offers some clear upside as a stash pick in the 50s because of his length and athleticism. Begarin participated in the G League Elite camp and measured 6-foot-4 ¾ in socks with a 6-foot-11 3/4 wingspan. On the court, he looked raw as a playmaker but showed enough athleticism to pique the interest of scouts. His data from his season in the French League is similar; he still has a long way to go as a shooter and playmaker but his defense and athleticism in transition can keep him on the court while he develops. 59. Ariel Hukporti, C, Kedanai Nevis Hukporti comes off a tremendously disappointing season in Lithuania and didn’t exactly wow people at the draft combine, but the 7-foot teenager showed enough to stay on the radar and likely gets selected in the back of the second round. However, the big takeaway is that he’s just not all that athletic. Hukporti had just a 24.5-inch no-step vert, the second-worst at the combine, and didn’t have any moments that popped on the court either. To stick as a pro he’ll have to show a skill level from the center spot that we just haven’t seen thus far. 60. Vrenz Bleijenbergh, SF, Oostende There is at least a 20 percent chance that this isn’t a real person but rather a name that Sam Vecenie made up and decided to roll with after an accidental pocket tweet. In all seriousness, Bleijenbergh offers a glimmer of hope as kind of a poor man’s Aleksej Pokusevski. He’s a tissue-soft 6-foot-11 forward with a bad body, and even playing in a bad league in Belgium he struggled with defense, physicality and getting much of anything accomplished inside the paint. However, he can shoot, pass, and handle the ball, which is what generates some of the Poku comps. Again, his passport likely vaults him over several guys who are objectively better players right now; a team can leave Bleijenbergh to develop for half a decade and check back in later to see if it has a player or not. While we’re here, a couple of other players to watch that I suspect won’t keep their names in the draft, but in case they do: Nikita Mikhailovski, a 6-foot-7 Russian forward with some shooting skill and hints of playmaking chops, and Olek Balcerowski, a Polish 7-footer who plays (for good and bad) a bit like Andrea Bargnani.
Spoiler Group 8: My top 2-way guys 61. McKinley Wright IV, PG, Colorado, Senior A tough defender who knows how to run an offense, Wright did a solid job at the combine but his lack of size and iffy shooting combine to make it an uphill battle for him to crack a rotation. Most players of this ilk end up playing in the NBA, but in 10-day increments. Wright is 6-foot ¼ in socks and shot just 32.8 percent from 3 in his four seasons at Colorado. He wasn’t a frequent 3-point shooter and his form wouldn’t suggest to you that he should be, although he did muster an 80.3 percent career mark from the line. The solidness of the rest of his offensive game is a stronger selling point. Wright is a good distributor and penetrator, has some craft in the paint as a finisher and gets into the ball defensively. If the shooting comes around, you can see him turning into another Monte Morris. 62. David Duke, SG, Providence, Junior Duke is a big guard with a strong frame and handles the ball well enough to run the point, which at times can make you think you’re watching a poor man’s Joe Johnson. Alas, he’s a minus athlete who really struggles to explode and finish in the paint, and as a result, plays as an inefficient volume scorer. There are aspects of a 3-and-D game here too, ones that could perhaps be realized in a lower-usage role, and he’s a plus passer. Nonetheless, the overall impression is of somebody who is not quite draftable because of his athletic limitations. 63. Kessler Edwards, SF, Pepperdine, Junior A robotic mover, but one who can hit some 3s and play some defense, Edwards has now possibly become overrated for being underrated. There are some real limitations to his game, both skill-wise and athletically, but there’s a chance he sticks as a low-usage 3-and-D guy. 64. Jeremiah Robinson-Earl, PF, Villanova, Sophomore You don’t want to completely count out Robinson-Earl because he was a productive college player with good feel, but his translation to the pros feels iffy at best. He’s a below-average athlete, has a short wingspan for his height, and has yet to prove himself as a 3-point threat. So what’s his advantage at the next level? 65. Aaron Wiggins, SG, Maryland, Junior Wiggins was one of the better players at the G League Elite camp after quietly having a solid year at Maryland. He’s not amazing at any one thing, but he’s a wing defender with a 6-foot-9 ¾ wingspan and has enough offense to not kill you. 66. Duane Washington Jr., SG, Ohio State, Junior Impressed at the combine by knowing exactly what he is as a player, a small guard looking to carve out a Bryn Forbes-type career as a bench gunner. The biggest issue is the simplest one: Can he really shoot? Only made 36.1 percent in three college seasons. 67. Daishen Nix, PG, G League Ignite He’s still really young and has some playmaking craft to him, but Nix struggled in the G League last year and was arguably even worse in the combine. The hope was that the Chicago setting and a visibly improved body would allow him to perform better, but he struggled mightily in both games. Nix isn’t much of a shooter, and the concern is that he’s also not an NBA athlete. He really needs to spend another year in the G League and try again. 68. Jordan Schakel, SG, San Diego State, Senior He’s almost surely not an NBA athlete, but Schakel will get some looks because he can flat-out strooooke it. He made 46.1 percent of his 3s as a senior and shot 90.8 percent from the line – do I have your attention now? That skill alone will likely get his foot in the door. 69. Dalano Banton, SF, Nebraska, Sophomore File this one under “just weird enough to be interesting.” Banton can’t shoot, but he has a point guard’s handle and passing ability at 6-foot-9, and one wonders how that might look in a more open NBA floor and separated from an atrocious Nebraska team. Banton made a positive impression at the G League elite camp and I suspect he’ll be high on teams’ 2-way lists as a developmental project. 70. Sandro Mamukelashvili, PF, Seton Hall, Senior Another interesting guy because of an unusual skill set, Mamukelashvili is 6-foot-11 but likes to handle the ball and create for others. Chance are he isn’t stout enough physically to defend the five, and he hasn’t quite shown enough floor-spacing ability to make a respectable case as a four. If one of those things changes, however, he could be a player.
Hollinger goes against the grain compared to several mock drafts. Not so much on #1 and #2, but as you go down his list. Trippy! Thanks for the posts, @J.R., passing along the confusion. ;-)
On the draft front -- according to the intel I’ve been able to gather -- the Raptors have zeroed in on Gonzaga’s six-foot-five two-way guard Jalen Suggs as their preferred choice if he’s available, though six-foot-nine do-it-all defender Scottie Barnes of Florida State would be a more than welcome fallback option if Suggs is off the board. https://www.sportsnet.ca/nba/article/simmons-suggs-raptors-weighing-possibilities-ahead-draft/
Hollinger not that high on Green, crossing my fingers he's wrong. Also reading about Isiah Jackson made me think about Capela lol And thanks @J.R.
So, If the Pistons take Cade and the Rockets take Green as expected, but the Cavs throw a curveball and take Suggs, the Raptors' selection will be Barnes over Mobley? That's very interesting.
To drink or not to drink during the draft. THAT is the question! How about a drinking game!? Anytime a player gets compared to an all time great - SHOTS!! (we'll all be dead of alcohol poisoning within the first ten picks)
