[3rd pick] Who do you want?

THIS IS NOT A MOCK DRAFT! He’s projecting their careers.

https://www.cbssports.com/college-b...rd-top-big-board-projecting-best-pro-careers/

Below, I rank out the top 30 prospects in this year's draft class and, beyond that, am specifically attempting to project who will have the best NBA careers well over a decade from now, once all the players in this class have seen their time come and go in the peros.

This is not a projection of how teams will select next Wednesday on the first night of the NBA Draft. It's also not a projection of the order I think the players will be picked.

But it is the order of how I think they will wind up ranking more than a decade into the future.

I'm also not trying to guess who will be the best rookie or be the best at the end of this decade. It's taking the entire career into account. Last year, I told you I liked Dereck Lively II as a top-three prospect when nobody else was that high on him. (One year in, it's looking good. But we'll see how the next decade or so plays out.) The year before that, I went on the record about Paolo Banchero being No. 1 days before the Magic shocked most everyone on draft night and picked him first.

As we get going, I have to drop this context: This year's draft class is the most underwhelming (at least going into draft night) of any in the past 15 years since I've been covering the NBA Draft. There will be good players that emerge from this class. Maybe we wind up with one or two great ones. Maybe. But in spending the past couple of weeks burrowing into this class and talking to sources and evaluating what's waiting ... it's left a lot to be desired. It doesn't seem like this class is strong at the top, and I'm not seeing the kind of depth into the late teens and 20s that we usually get. Just a weird year.

Big Board projecting NBA careers

1. Dalton Knecht — I went back and forth a dozen times on who to go with at No. 1. Big picture, I'm betting on the uncertainty of this year's draft class leading to an unsuspecting player winding up as the best pick -- and for that player to get taken outside of the top five. Knecht is the choice. Knecht is beating guys at 2, 3 and 4 by millimeters, effectively. I'm gambling on picking him to be the best NBA player of 2024's draft class because of his dead-eye aim, his size, confidence, toughness and ability to be a flame thrower in the NBA. Knecht's fit could be paramount (I acknowledge this is a stretch to project him having the best career of the bunch) to meeting his potential. The shot will translate, as will his turbo motor and confrontational athleticism. He's got range on defense and is a vocal presence on the floor. There were stretches last season when he threatened Zach Edey's claim to being the most impactful player in college hoops. Bet on scoring, bet on shooters, bet on big wings who pile up points in bunches. Bet on Dalton Knecht.

2. Alex Sarr — I got a chance to see Sarr train for a little bit while on a recent trip to Santa Barbara, California, and the tools/size/skills are clear. In a great draft class, Sarr would fall to 4, 5 or 6 in the pecking order. Here, he's plausible as the best long-term bet, but his lack of shooting prowess is what's holding me back from believing he's going to wind up as the best NBA player in this class. I expect him to grow into a very good two-level scorer who can be a 20-point-per-game player, most likely as a very strong No. 2 option. Sarr's appeal is with his engagement and dependability as a shot-blocking power forward who will guard 3 through 5 and likely become a defensive anchor to build up a franchise needing more heft in the frontcourt.

3. Reed Sheppard — If Sheppard was 6-6 instead of 6-3, he'd be the No. 1 pick in the draft. His measurables and some legitimate questions about his defensive durability are the only things holding him back. If you watched him play for one game or 30, you saw the most instinctive player in college basketball last season. Plainly put, Sheppard has the nose for the right play way more often than not. His hands are super-quick and his shot is elite. He made an outrageous 52.1% of his 144 3-point attempts. The Kentucky native has a great handle, plays with his own pace and can adjust for essentially any kind of teammate. He also doesn't hunt shots; his passing eye is A-level and his conditioning leaves little room for questions. Sheppard is a hooper's hooper and has a 3-point shot that will keep him employed in the NBA for more than a decade. I expect his impact to be immense and believe he'll threaten with averaging close to 20 points by the time he hits his second contract.

4. Zaccharie Risacher — Born in Spain, Risacher's nationality is French and he's become the buzzy projection to go No. 1 to the Hawks in recent days. I think this draft is such a crapshoot that I don't take issue with it, but I'm not overwhelmed by Risacher's case as the most well-rounded prospect with the highest ceiling in 2024. The good: He has good handle for his size, displays a lot of enticing instincts for a stretch big at such a young age and could be a devastating mismatch from outside if his 3-point shot remains above 40% as an NBAer. The wait-and-see: He gets lost on defense with regularity, he doesn't have upper-tier athleticism and I'd argue he lacks a certain ball-domination quality you'd want out of a No. 1 pick. But he's a really good prospect, and I think we'll see more and more players like him populating the league by the end of this decade.

5. Devin Carter — Carter has done great pre-draft work to get his name into the lottery conversation, but I'm taking it a step further and predicting he will wind up with one of the five best careers of all 2024 prospects. Carter's two-way ability is verified; he can defend most guards and wings and will willingly put that claim to the test over the course of this summer and into his rookie season. Carter is a very good athlete and fits well in the modern NBA's prototype of what a point guard plays like. His shot has improved since he was in high school, which is why I'm aggressive in my placement of him here. One of my few will-not-fail prospects in the class. He also has the genes: His father, Anthony, played in the league.

6. Donovan Clingan — I put the top six guys in this class on a tier amongst each other. I don't think the difference between Clingan and Sarr is all that great, and I'd bank on Clingan not being around once the sixth pick is on the clock. One of the best things I can say about Clingan is that he plays big and so well knowing how big he can be. He doesn't look awkward; he looks like he's growing more comfortable with who he is and what he can do with each passing month. Speaking of passing, I think it's his most underrated talent. You'll get a lob threat, yes, and you'll have a paint defender who could become elite in shot-blocking by the end of his rookie season. I've got him outside the top five because doubts linger about his impact as an offensive player, and it's hard to envision him ever growing into a perimeter option.

7. Kyle Filipowski
8. Cody Williams
9. Zach Edey

10. Stephon Castle — I'm lower on Castle than most because I wonder if he ever becomes a respectable NBA shooter. The defense? That's never going to be a concern. He will be a top-five defender (at worst) on whatever team drafts him the day he arrives at the facility. Yes, he's that good. And that skill set is not deteriorating. Castle loves a challenge and won many of them en route to helping UConn win a national title. But, for me, he's a tough sell as an NBA point guard; I question if he can or will grow into that role. He could thrive off the ball, to an extent, but if he's not going to be capable of producing north of 15 points per game, is he top-five-pick worthy? Put him in a position to thrive by leaning on his physical traits and without forcing him to morph into something for which he isn't ready.

11. Rob Dillingham
12. Nikola Topić
13. Ja’Kobe Walter
14. Terrence Shannon Jr.
15. Tyler Kolek
16. Jared McCain

17. Matas Buzelis — I first saw Buzelis in 2021 and still have never been able to settle into the idea that he's got the package to validate being a top-10 NBA pick. But I assure you he'll be gone in the top 10. I'm projecting he winds up as a good NBA player who hits a second contract and flirts with being a starter near the end of his fourth season. Lacks interior presence, and TBD if he'll have enough of a consistent long-range shot to be dependable. A nice project as a stretch 4, and I've little doubt he'll be an eager learner. But the most boring thing you can be when analyzing prospects is falling in line with groupthink. In this case, I'm a seller relative to all others on Buzelis.

18. Isaiah Collier
19. DaRon Holmes II
20. Ron Holland
21. Tidjane Salaun
22. Trey Alexander
23. Yves Missi
24. KJ Simpson
25. Tyler Smith
26. Justin Edwards
27. Harrison Ingram
28. Jamal Shead
29. Bub Carrington
30. Ryan Dunn

Five players outside my top 30 who could make me look foolish years from now: Kyshawn George (Miami), Tristan da Silva (Colorado), Cam Christie (Minnesota), Kel'el Ware (Indiana), Antonio Reeves (Kentucky).

 

Danny Leroux and Sam Vecenie

https://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/276140/RealGM-Radio-Sam-Vecenie-On-The-2024-NBA-Draft-Jun-2024
or
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/263-...isode/sam-vecenie-on-the-nba-draft-187211409/

8:31 Vecenie: I do not feel it’s two guys at the top. I have five guys in that tier. (Sarr, Sheppard, Castle, Risacher, Clingan) That is not the normal tier of a good draft. Those are all tier 3 guys in a normal draft.

9:01 Vecenie: Atlanta fans hear Clingan and get disappointed. There are questions on how he translates to playoff basketball. If they take Clingan, it’s probably ok. I don’t love it. He wouldn’t be my pick. I’d try to trade down but you have to have partners and unclear if those partners exist. I don’t think they have a right answer and don’t know if they have a particularly wrong answer as long as they stay within that group of 5 guys. I don’t envy this position. I worry about their process for making the decision.

10:46 Leroux: Every single player is an eye of the beholder guy. You have to put these caveats on. Clingan is a great example. He does the things he does well. Tall dude, protects the rim, like the way he plays, plays hard, with intention, unselfish offensively even if his offensive skill level isn’t that high but isn’t scheme versatile defensively, limited offensively, so he’s a type. How valuable that type is depends on myriad of factors of where you see the NBA going. That’s true all over the board.

11:43 One game with Sarr was under-19 FIBA game and was watching for Sarr. I realized three-quarters of the way in that Risacher was playing in that game. That’s how invisible he was. That’s not representative of the sample. There are things I like. I added in my Sarr notes, “Oh my god, this guy who might be the #1 pick, I have zero notes. I haven’t mentioned his name once.”

12:36 Vecenie: It’s quite scary. Zach did take a leap from last summer to this year. I agree, I did not like Risacher coming into this year. I thought he was late first, early second guy. The big difference was the shot. He started making shots at a high level but in stretches. He started the year on fire, like 48% from three, then for 3 months, was like 22% and final month, back up over 40%. How do you parse through that streakiness? He’s seen as the safe player in this draft. I don’t know if I agree with that. He’s somewhat safe? He’s a player type we know works in the NBA but if he’s a 35% shooter vs. 40% shooter, it completely changes who he is as a player. It makes him drastically less valuable. If he’s 35%, he might be last 3 years of Nic Batum’s career kind of guy. Not a super athlete, not a crazy across the board defender but good help defender, good in team defense, shown some passing but not a ton where you feel he’ll be a playmaker. If he’s not a shooter, he doesn’t have Batum’s athleticism or passing to fall back on. That’s why I say last couple years of Batum, way more limited. He’d be a rotational wing but it might be more of…so limited like he’s a 5th guy on the court as opposed to a dude.

16:10 Vecenie: This is a weird class. It’s a class where I’m realizing my favorite players are all the guards. I like the guards more than the wings and forwards. Buzelis, Holland, Risacher, Knecht, Salaun, I feel I’m a touch lower on those guys than where teams are when I talk to them. Risacher seems like top 3-4, I’m more 4-5. Buzelis, you’ll talk to teams where he’s all over the map. I have him 8th or 9th. Holland at 6th or 7th. Knecht at like 12. Salaun at 14, who is a real project and will be trickier. I do feel I have a lower grade on and guys I like are Carter, Carrington, McCain, Sheppard. It’s interesting to figure out who your guys are in this draft. I’m with you in general that I don’t love the wings. I don’t hate them nor love them. I definitely don’t like them consensus wise compared to where others have them.

18:30 Guys you’re higher on compared to consensus:

Leroux:
1. Carlton Carrington (18:44)
2. Yves Missi (26:42)
3. Rob Dillingham (33:03) (Vecenie: I’m lower on him. … (35:16) Has guys 6-15 in same tier, Dillingham last guy #15.; (37:02) Reason I’m lower is how far off is he from being able to play on a NBA court defensively? He’s ok on the ball against guards, it’s everything else.; (38:10) Cal’s offense, everyone is giving these Kentucky guards and I love Reed Sheppard, the Kentucky offense was great. It was well spaced and ran somewhat modern principles. They let these kids get up and down. For all the warts Cal has and there were a lot this year, such as playing his two best players off the bench, not playing Reeves/Sheppard/Dillingham as much as they could have was inexcusable. I will say I don’t think you can give these two the Kentucky guard bump like Maxey or Herro. They did play a modern style of offense this year.)

4. Cody Williams (40:12)
5. Baylor Scheierman (42:36)

Middle ground guy Reed Sheppard (46:38/47:11)

Sheppard was the 3rd guy I watched filmed on. I’m still scrambled. I simultaneously think he’s intensely overrated as a one-on-one man defender but underrated as an offensive player. I’ll start with the negative.

47:41 Vecenie: It’s worth discussing. His defense is complicated. It’s not like you see .7 blocks and 2.5 steals. You expect an incredible defender. It’s all over the map.

47:55 Leroux: He’s a very good defensive playmaker in part because he had the latitude to venture a mile and half off his guy, which is wild for a guard. He has great instincts. … I was stunned when I got to the defensive film. I have it bold and underlined. He gives up drives so much more easily than I anticipated. Is it footwork or physical limitations? I think it’s both but physical limitations more than anything. He measured well but he’s not that kind of athlete to me and he’s small, Kamba Walker size. You brought it up with Dillingham. With Sheppard, he does these other things well but in a way sort of the worst parts. Sheppard can be in a good defense but you don’t want him point of attack.

49:38 Vecenie: He will have moments where he seems to disengage off the ball.

50:00 Leroux: Another weird thing with his defensive film was I thought him having a modest role offensive (18 usage rate), that would give him more fire and I hoped the film would be better. So you have that but he can shoot the ever living crap out of the ball. Even though I don’t love his shake or handle, he’s an interesting passer. It’s basically this idea where you can get into the numbers: Sheppard shot 53% on pull-up twos, 51% on pull-up threes, over 1.5 points per possession on catch and shoot jump shots. I’m not sure he can be the primary engine. He shoots well enough to be part of one.

52:02 Sheppard’s ideal scenario for his offense

Vecenie: I would love to run him off screens. I would love him to lead the fast break. He’s a good rebounder for his size. Probably best transition passer in this class. His hit aheads are unbelievable. Unbelievable at getting the offense rolling if he has any sort of mismatch or defense is scrambling. If he’s off the ball in transition, completely lethal as a transition 3pt shooter. Get a body 30ft from the rim or its curtains. On ball player, when they gave him freedom to go and really gave him ball screens (Miss. State, Tennessee), you saw a lot of juice there. He was really capable of getting into the paint, using the threat of his jumper, using change of pace to get into his floater game, get all the way to the rim. Showed a lot as a passer within half court settings. Then there were other games he was invisible. Is this who he is or a construct of the Kentucky thing? Your turn, my turn with Dillingham/Reeves/Wagner? It was so clear from game 3/4 that Reed was their guy and refused to lean into it until later. I don’t want to use the Oakland game to speak too much because Oakland uses this funky ass zone and got Gohlke’d and I don’t know what to think there. It seems like he lost confidence in that game and that felt concerning.

54:08 Leroux: I’m not certain Sheppard will be an on-ball dynamo. The role being similar to what Detroit envisioned with Ivey, push in transition but he’s a much better shooter than Ivey. Then figure out his defensive role. The possibility of being viable on-ball is why he’ll be reasonably high on my board. Haven’t placed him yet.

54:48 Vecenie: The ceiling is obscenely high.

54:52 Leroux: If the pull-up jump shot and catch-and-shoot jump shot is real, you can be a viable offensive force without being a dominant athlete, without being dominant size wise. You can do it. It’s hard but possible. He also has a relatively high floor, relative to the guards in this class because of the shooting. He’ll be in the rotation. Not sure he’ll be a starter, not sure he’ll be a star but he can be that.

 

55:45 Guys lower on compared to consensus

Leroux
1. Matas Buzelis (55:50) — I don’t see it. I think he’s a backup. |—Vecenie: He’s a bet to me. He’s a significant gamble.—| He’s a gamble I don’t want to make. He’s a AAAA player.

56:46 Vecenie: The intel is awesome. Good kid. Extremely hard worker.

57:51 Leroux: Not big enough to play center. Jump shot and feet aren’t good enough to thrive at the four. He can play it. Offensive game isn’t dynamic enough when adjusting to NBA talent.

58:37 Vecenie: If I told you he’d become a catch and shoot threat?

Leroux: Higher chance he’s a low level starter.

Vecenie: If he’s like 37%-38%?

Leroux: Then I get more confident for his chance to start but he’s still a four, not a five. He damn well better shoot or he’s not a starter at all.

59:20 Vecenie: I have Matas outside the top 10. I’m not the most enormous fan compared to where others have him. I understand he can be this open floor player and dribble/pass/shoot in theory but never loved him as a passer/playmaker and the shot is a one-year bet (40% at Sunrise last year). It’s a big bet on him being something more than a standstill 3pt shooter. He’s best case a guy that hits spot threes in the corner as opposed to a pull-up 3pt shooter to use his gravity as an on-ball player. The people that like him are people who see a GG Jackson style breakout. GG was always more flexible and comfortable as a ball handler in tight space. I worry Matas is someone that gets overrated based on being big and able to play in open floor scenarios. But also, these are guys I tend to miss on. I had Scottie Barnes 5th/6th and he went 4th. What I missed on Scottie was his playmaking, cover ground. I don’t think Matas is that. Is there a chance I’m missing something on Matas? I had him like 11th.

2. Ron Holland (1:01:40)
3. Isaiah Collier (1:07:16)

 

4. Stephon Castle (1:11:10) — What stunned me was how little he ran offense at UConn. There’s a possibility that that player is in there.

1:11:36 Vecenie: I don’t think he’s a point guard. Cam Spencer ran the offense more than Stephon.

1:12:15 Leroux: Castle is an interesting athlete. It was at times frustrating where he wasn’t applying that athleticism on offense or defense. Shot 27% on low volume of threes. Over 50% on twos, which is fine. Respectable FT shooter. There isn’t enough juice on ball and don’t trust his jump shot. There is a way for him to be successful. Not saying he’s a bust. I was harsh on Buzelis. Castle isn’t in that conversation. The ways he can be most successful is way beyond what I saw on film.

1:13:12 Vecenie: With Steph, part of this is me thinking he will shoot down the road. Not saying he can shoot it now. When you watch him shoot to the left, the hitch looks more exaggerated. From the right side of the court or going right, he tends to take shots off the catch, off the hop and things look smoother and fluid. I wonder if a good shooting coach can just get him to take shots off the hop consistently and be able to straighten out his balance. When going left, he really leans left. I think there is a reasonable bet on him shooting. If he shoots, he has a chance to be the highest upside player in the class. He can be a legitimate two-way secondary creator who can play in ball screens, attack and get to the rim, hopefully knock down shots occasionally. I think there’s real upside case swing for him, mixed with his defense. Really good defender. Put him on Mark Sears. Put him on Baylor Scheierman. You’d see him in a variety of settings and was great at all of it. He’s a legit 1 through 4 defender in the NBA, which is hard to find. Offensively, you hope the shot comes around enough. I had Isaac Okoro like 5th/6th in that class. I recognize I’m falling into similar traps with Steph as I did with Isaac. He did everything for Auburn to win games. Okoro is turning into a really good player. He’ll make 8 figures per year this summer. 9 points, 3 rebounds, 2 assists, 49/39/70, awesome on-ball defender, solid team defender. I say all that to say I’m cognizant I could be falling into the same trap with Steph as I did Okoro. Steph also has more capability running in ball screens, sees the court way better, processing and feel for the game is better than Okoro’s. His sense of spacial awareness is really high. I think the world of that UConn coaching staff. They do an amazing job of making it so non-shooters are capable of spacing the court by screening, having them move around constantly, flashing, cutting, they do a great job of spacing the court for non-shooters. That could be where I’m overrating Castle but if he shoots it, the ceiling is really, really high.

1:17:32 Leroux: I’m more of he’s a good defender than elite.

Vecenie: I think of him more as a versatile, flexible defender than this incredible on-ball defender or defensive playmaker.

Leroux: Two guys physical comps are Melton and GPII.

Vecenie: No, he’s way bigger than Melton. Steph is 6’5/6’6 without shoes with a 6’9 wingspan.

Leroux: I like the defensive film on him. … I think he was put in favorable position to succeed than the average player in this class who played anywhere (French league, G League, college X). … The guy who doesn’t have enough juice to be an on-ball star and isn’t a sure fire shooter, those players get schemed and exploited.

1:20:32 Vecenie: We’ve talked over the years about how we make our board and expected value. I have Castle and Clingan right next to each other. I have Castle one spot ahead. Steph’s upside is higher than Donovan’s in a playoff setting enough to where I’d rather gamble on that than the Donovan Clingan expected value equation, like his middle ground being higher than Steph’s. His likely outcome is so much higher than Steph’s but if Steph hits, a chance to be a real difference maker. …

1:21:38 Vecenie: This is another question. I had this conversation with Bryce on my podcast. Someone brought up Tatum, if you could start a team with any player, he said Tatum. I don’t totally agree. It did make me think about this. In a vacuum, SGA is a better player than Tatum. When starting a team, I think there is a chance I’d take Tatum. Tatum is so good at everything else defensively and so flexible defensively and a better passer/playmaker than SGA and this incredible rebounder and wing scorer/playmaker. He was still in my opinion Boston’s best player despite his shooting abandoning him. Even though SGA is more talented, I do wonder if I’d take Tatum over SGA because of the flexibility it gives me building the rest of my roster.

Leroux: Combined with Jaylen Brown, having your foundation being two wing-sized guys who can shoot and play make, even if neither are an offensive juggernaut like Steph or LeBron or various guys. What they give you is the ability to add any type at any position. This is going back to our brief discussion on Cody Williams. Far worse prospect than Tatum but the idea is if you have players wing-size, who can dribble/pass/shoot, you can have a PG who is not an offensive engine like Derrick White or Jrue Holiday. You can have centers that play different ways. The argument has merit but I’d probably have SGA over Tatum in this context.

Vecenie: Giannis is a better player than Tatum but he cramps the rest of your team build. You need a spacing center. You have to use substantial assets to go get one unless you get lucky like with Brook Lopez.

Leroux: Zion is an even more extreme version of that because he’s not the defender Giannis is.

Vecenie: I just wonder if I would take Tatum. Think of the iterations Boston has gone through. They failed building so many times. They tried Kemba, Kyrie, Isaiah Thomas, signed Gordon Hayward. But you have this backbone to make six straight Eastern Conference Finals or whatever it is. You never get below a certain level and that’s valuable.

Leroux: Another parallel with Anthony Davis. You could argue both are overmatched as number ones on a championship team in a traditional sense. They are phenomenal well fitting as the 2nd best player on a high level team because they don’t take anything off the table and add a whole hell of a lot. It isn’t a luxury most get. Luka won’t get to be the 2nd best player on a team. Tatum’s ability and lack of weaknesses sets the table for a lot of it to work. Those players are extremely important, hard to find and important to keep.

Vecenie: Maybe this is where we’ll finish here. How the playoffs shape your mind in terms of team building. One thing that stands out, to win a title in today’s NBA, you need a 5-out look. It doesn’t need to be your primary look. It can be your counter to when teams take away certain things. Every title team at this point needs a 5-out look. I have Kyle Filipowski higher than some people do (16th). Having bigs who are legitimate dribble/pass/shoot threats are valuable. They give you that ability to play 5-out. I also like his defense more. I do feel having a big who can do that is worth its weight in gold.

Leroux: I think so too but with a huge caveat. You still have to be able to defend. You can’t be 5-out if you can’t defend. I’m lower on Filipowski. … That’s why Chet Holmgren is so special. Why we’ll see with Wemby. …

1:30:38 Vecenie: This is the whole reason I have Sarr #1. He has a chance to shoot it that Clingan probably doesn’t.

…

1:35:26 Vecenie: Kyshawn George, I don’t get it. I’ve gone back and watched the French League tape. That league is not good, no disrespect to anyone playing in that league. He averaged 3pts in that league. Then as an older freshman, averaged like 8/3/3 and when they gave him the ball late in the season, they lost like their last 10 games. On some level, I do need these guys to be a certain threshold of being good at basketball. I get he’s a “late bloomer” and late growth spurt but this my explanation of where I’m coming from. It’s hard to wrap my head around a guy who has never been a standout entering the NBA, being a first round pick.

…

 

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5574543/2024/06/20/rockets-draft-notebook-donovan-clingan/

• There have been several teams that have expressed a desire to move to No. 3 but there are three teams, according to team and league sources that have been most vocal: Charlotte, Memphis and Portland. The Grizzlies and Hornets, in particular, have been rather aggressive in their hopes of acquiring the No. 3 pick, sources said.

• The third draft night possibility involves the Rockets moving back, and collecting additional draft capital, significant enough to warrant Houston relinquishing its top-three selection. In this instance, the Grizzlies pose an interesting option. Both general manager Rafael Stone and head coach Ime Udoka are fans of veteran guard Marcus Smart, league sources said. Is there a possibility Memphis could entice Houston by offering Smart in addition to the No. 9 pick and future assets, to move up and grab Clingan if he isn’t already gone? Tennessee’s Dalton Knecht, who has fans within the Rockets organization, could be available if Houston were to move back.

• …Now, with Udoka’s presence a significant factor in decision-making, various league sources believe Houston’s big board planning involves three branches in addition to the other respected voices in the war room:

-The upside and positional versatility angle, spearheaded by Stone.
-The analytical angle, courtesy of assistant general manager Eli Witus.
-The win-now, defensive-oriented angle, from Udoka.

There are a few prospects who theoretically fit in at least two of these three categories but in recent days, Clingan and Sheppard have separated themselves from the likes of Stephon Castle, Sarr and Risacher on Houston’s big board, league and team sources said. Clingan, the 20-year-old big man, is believed to be the current leader, seen as the only player who fits all three categories.

• Sheppard will visit the Rockets by the end of the week, team sources said, but up until this point, Houston has encountered some difficulties in scheduling workouts with top prospects. For example, Clingan and Şengün share the same agent, and the expectation for a top prospect being taken is that they will play. On the surface, minutes at center under Udoka appear slim with Şengün and Steven Adams on the roster — which presents a conflict of interest. Another example is Castle, who has been steadfast about his desired point guard position which impacts which teams he chooses to visit.