How Do Brandon Ingram and Ben Simmons Fit With The Teams at the Top of the Draft?

Ben Simmons and Brandon Ingram seem to have separated themselves in the battle for the number one overall pick (though don't count out a surprise either), so how do they fit on the teams that could potentially pick them?

Philadelphia 76ers

Simmons

With Jahlil Okafor, Nerlens Noel, and Joel Embiid currently on the roster, not to mention the similarly skilled Dario Saric likely coming to Philly next season, Simmons fit on the Sixers is not ideal, either from a roster construction standpoint, or on the floor. Simmons best position is power forward, where he would be completing with all four of those players for minutes. A trade could obviously happen if they really want to give the reigns to Simmons, but it is still uncertain whether he is actually more talented than those others and deserving of minutes over them. On the court, the fit is just as questionable, considering what Philly needs most is shooting and perimeter scoring, areas where Simmons will not be a help. Play him at power forward and you have to sit one of those other four, play him at small forward and you might have the worst spacing of all time. Defensively, if you played him next to Okafor you'd be awful, or if you played him on the perimeter more, it would create too much pressure on Okafor to cut off penetration. Simmons is undoubtedly talented, but his flaws match up with Philadelphia's flaws, at a position where they are log-jammed.

Ingram

As bad as Simmons fit is with the Sixers is, Ingram's is good. He fills a major hole at small forward for them and is a knock-down 40% three point shooter. He would be groomed to grow into a primary perimeter scorer alongside Philly's big men while providing them will valuable room to work on the block, or in pick and roll. Defensively, his length and toughness would be an asset to help shield Okafor from too much penetration, while his flaws, mainly struggling to score inside, wouldn't be an issue because they wouldn't need that of him. Philadelphia is several pieces away from being a competitive team, but Ingram's shooting and length on defense would be a boon to their competency.

Los Angeles Lakers

Simmons

The Lakers really don't have much in the way of sure-fire starting level players, D'Angelo Russell is the closest thing they have, but he will need to improve his defense to be a starter on a good team. Julius Randle has potential, but he might be best suited as a bench player that can take advantage of back-ups while being protected from defending starters. Simmons is just as questionable a defender and shooter as Randle, but he is a more creative offensive player that the Lakers can build their offense around, particularly with good shooters like Russell on the floor. Because their roster is such a blank slate, LA is an ideal location for Simmons, who is difficult fit into many existing offenses and is better suited being built around, which the Lakers presumably could do. If they draft Simmons, the Lakers will want to surround him and presumably Russell with plus shooters and defenders, as you'll have enough creators on the floor with those two, but defense and spacing would be potential issues. The only downside to Simmons in LA is the inevitable asinine comparisons to Magic Johnson.

Ingram

Ingram fits just as well in LA, which will have a Kobe Bryant-sized hole at small forward and are mostly a blank-slate when it comes to starter level players. Ingram's shooting and defensive potential would give the Lakers any number of ways to build, the most effective would be finding a strong pick-and-roll partner for Russell, a mobile, defensive center, and another wing-shooter. Spread the floor offensively, run pick-and-roll, with Ingram and another shooter spotting up, waiting for a kick-out to shoot or attack with the center waiting on the baseline. This is a very do-able offense where Ingram would be a key piece because he can shoot, attack close-outs and eventually run pick-and-roll himself as either the ball-handler or the screener.

Boston Celtics (via Brooklyn Nets)

Simmons

With how flexible Boston is both on the court and from an asset standpoint, Simmons would work with the Celtics simply because they would make it work. They have the pieces and creativity to either make their offense work around him or move players and picks to get players that work with him, if they are certain that he is the star they have been waiting for. As far as the current roster fit, Avery Bradley and Jae Crowder are absolutely ideal fits with Simmons because they can shoot and defend, areas where Simmons struggles significantly. Kelly Olynyk as center is an ideal offensive fit but their defense might be pretty terrible. For Boston, I think acquiring a defense and pick-and-roll proficient center (Dwight Howard perhaps?) and use Simmons as the ball-handler while playing Crowder, Bradley, and Isaiah Thomas could be a deadly offensive lineup that doesn't get killed defensively. 

Ingram

Like with Simmons, Boston will find a way to make it work with Ingram if they think he is a foundational piece. Ingram and Crowder would be a deadly interchangeable offensive and defense pairing, especially when Ingram gets stronger. Boston has so many players that can play in a multiplicity of ways, that adding a player like Ingram who can shoot, has amazing length, and should be able to handle the ball effectively and guard multiple positions down the line, would only serve to make them more versatile. An interesting side story with Ingram, and really Simmons too, is that neither is really what you would call a franchise changer, so Boston may look to move either in a package for a more proven superstar.

Phoenix Suns

Simmons

If Phoenix doesn't blowup their roster over the Summer, Simmons isn't an ideal fit. The Suns do have a  hole at power forward, but they already have a too many ballhandlers in the kitchen issue with Brandon Knight and Eric Bledsoe, both of whom can shoot but aren't exactly knockdown in that area. Now, if one of those two is traded it might be a better fit, but I still don't necessarily see it, Phoenix has imploded before because of struggles sharing the point guard duties, they need less ball-dominant players and more overall well-rounded offensive players. The Suns need more of a shooter/defender at power forward that doesn't need to ball to be effective, which isn't Simmons at all.

Ingram

Not to sound like a broken record, but Ingram again fits really well in Phoenix. He is a player that doesn't need the ball to succeed and can effect the game just by being on the floor. Playing Ingram at small forward, with a new power forward or P.J. Tucker next to him and Devin Booker around a Bledsoe Tyson Chandler pick and roll would be devastating and a return to the classic Suns style. Eventually, when Ingram is stronger (and in some match-ups now) and you can play him at power forward with all three of Phoenix's guards, that would be something to see indeed. If neither Simmons or Ingram end up in Phoenix, Dragan Bender would be nice longterm fit at power forward.

Minnesota Timberwolves

Simmons

Considering two of Minnesota's young starters are pretty ineffective shooters, adding Simmons who is a completely ineffective shooter would not be ideal. Karl-Anthony Towns is actually the ideal center to player next to Simmons because he can protect the rim and shoot, but Andrew Wiggins and Ricky Rubio would just a be a spacing mess, especially because Simmons needs the ball to be effective, making Rubio entirely redundant. If Minnesota decides to trade Rubio, then Simmons would be a more interesting fit, especially if the Timberwolves find a point guard that is a knock-down shooter, with Zach LaVine at shooting guard.

Ingram

The Timberwolves main need is shooting, though Ingram is not an ideal fit because play small forward right now, which is Andrew Wiggins best natural position. Once Ingram fills out, he could definitely see significant time at power forward, which would work really well with Wiggins, Towns, Rubio, and LaVine, however right now I think it still might not be ideal. Though you could potentially player Ingram as the shooting guard offensively and small forward defensively, with Wiggins doing the opposite. If they don't end up with Ingram or Simmons, what Minnesota needs is a knockdown shooter at off-guard that can also be a secondary creator, like what Jamal Murray would provide. Still, Ingram's shooting and length would be a definite plus addition to the Timberwolves

Follow me at Twitter.com/double_tech

Wings in the 2016 NBA Draft

There aren't enough quality wings in the NBA to go around. A wing player that can guard multiple positions and space the floor is very desireable these days, and if that player can also do some other things, they can really be valuable to a team, helping to fill in the gaps, space the floor, and provide efficient, low usage production. The 2016 draft is not full of stars or even deep on above-average potential, but there are are few wings that could stick in a rotation, and not just because there is a dearth at their position. Brandon Ingram and Jaylen Brown are very likely to go in the top five to ten picks in the draft, but outside of that range, there are still some interesting wing prospects. 

Timothe Luwawu, Mega Leks

Measurements

Height: 6-7, Weight: 205, Age: 21

Season Stats

31.2 mpg 15.3 ppg 4.7 rpg 2.7 apg 1.9 spg 0.3 bpg 2.9 tpg 3.7 fpg .410 FG% .381 3P%, .709 FT%

Luwawu, a French native currently playing in Serbia, has all the tools to be an excellent 3-and-D wing player, with the upside for more. Luwawu is a smooth, coordinated player that has the vertical and horizontal athleticism to be a plus defender of both 2s and 3s, though big 3s might give him trouble. He is an opportunistic defender who gets a lot of steals, occasionally at the expense of solid defense. Offensively, he has improved his shooting this year, though his low release might cap his upside shooting off the dribble or in contested situations. He can handle the ball when given space and is an explosive finisher at the rim, though he requires some polish when it comes to contested finishes. His best role in the NBA is spotting up for threes, cutting to the basket, and attacking close-outs off the dribble. He has shown solid vision and the ability to find teammates, which would be bonus once the defense is rotating, after Luwawu attacks a close out.

Projected Draft Range: 10-20

Taurean Prince, Baylor

Measurements

Height: 6-8, Weight: 217, Wingspan: 6-11.5, Reach: 8-10.5 Age: 21

Season Stats

30.4 mpg 15.0 ppg 5.6 rpg 2.3 apg 1.5 spg, 0.7 bpg 2.7 tpg 2.3 fpg .427 FG% .351 3P% .830 FT%

Prince, who is young for a Senior, was off the radar his first two seasons at Baylor, but broke out as a Junior, showing a nice outside shot and toughness. His three-point percentage is down this season, to a more averag 35%, but he is converting free throws at a much higher rate, giving hope he can shoot more in the 37-40% range from three long term. Another aspect Prince has shown offensively this season is improvement as a playmaker, it is not at a level that you want him creating much offense yet, but he can be a positive ball-mover. Prince has shown toughness as a finisher and some off the dribble prowess, again not something you ask him to do often, but he can attack close-outs at the worst.

Defensively, Prince is very exciting. He plays in a zone at Baylor, but in academies and international tournaments he has played man-to-man and showed a fluidity and toughness defensively that makes you think, with his length and frame, that he could defend some 4s in a small-ball lineup.   

Projected Draft Range: 15-30

Paul Zipser, Bayern Muenchen

Measurements

Height: 6-8, Weight: 210, Age: 21

Season Stats

17.5 mpg 6.9 ppg 3.8 rpg 1.37 apg 0.5 spg 0.6 bpg 0.9 tpg 2.3 fpg .511 FG% .405 3P% .839 FT%

A native of Germany, Paul Zipser plays limited minutes in his home country but could develop into NBA rotation player. Zipser is an excellent athlete, a very good leader comfortable playing at full speed. He doesn't appear to have tremendous length, which might hold him back on the defensive end some, but he plays very hard on that end and is able to make a spectacular block or two. 

Offensively, he has been at least a 40% three point shooter the last several seasons, so there can be confidence he will at least be league average shooting the ball. Zipser's athletic ability comes into play, he is a bouncy slasher attacking the basket and you would hope that would translate to cutting and attack off of close-outs in the NBA. Zipser's years of playing in advanced schemes against men and professionals cannot be understated, it is a distinct advantage over most rookies and should help him be more ready to play early on.

Projected Draft Range: 20-40

Jarrod Uthoff, Iowa

Measurements

Height: 6-9.5, Weight: 216, Age: 23

Season Stats

30.7 mpg 18.8 ppg 6.5 rpg 1.1 apg 0.7 spg 2.9 bpg 1.1 tpg 1.7 fpg .457 FG% .416 3P% .817 FT%

Uthoff has really taken off this year, improving in every area despite playing just about the same minutes per game. Uthoff is a skilled player who can really shoot the ball, even some off the dribble, and handle the ball well. He has flashed passing ability, but it isn't something he does a whole lot of yet. From Uthoff, you'll want him to be a floor spacer that can make an occasional play off the bounce. His size will help him get his shot off, and he might even be able to play a little 4 in certain match ups, though you would be sacrificing post defense and rebounding. 

Defensively, Uthoff might struggle. He lacks strength and isn't particularly long or a great athlete, though he flashes some explosiveness and had a knack for blocking shots. it might be an uphill battle for Uthoff the make a roster, but his shooting and IQ is attractive, if the defense can sort itself out.

Projected Draft Range: Second round to undrafted

Dorian Finney-Smith, Florida

Measurement

Height: 6-7.5 Weight: 214 Wingspan: 6-11 Age: 23

Season Stats

31.8 mpg 14.9 ppg 8.4 rpg 2.1 apg 0.8 spg 0.8 bpg 2.0 tpg 2.0 fpg .452 FG% .382 3P% .748 FT%

After a season at Virginia Tech, Finney-Smith transferred to Florida where he has averaged twenty-five minutes a game or more for three seasons. The last two, Finney-Smith has really found his shooting stroke, making 40% of 259 three point attempts. At his size, that is an excellent number and bodes well for his chances in the NBA, particularly if he can play some small ball 4. He isn't a great slasher, but can take an open lane and finish powerfully at the rim. 

Finney-Smith has a strong frame and good athletic ability to project as at least an average NBA defender, despite so-so length. If his shooting continues and he can develop into a good defender, Finney-Smith could be a classic 3-and-D wing role player who can also add some value on the glass. At 23, Finney-Smith might lack much upside, but the hope is he could carve out a role in the NBA by maximizing his strengths.

Projected Draft Range: Second round to undrafted

Follow me on Twitter @double_tech

2016 NBA Draft Debate: Buddy Hield vs. Denzel Valentine

Buddy Hield, Oklahoma, Sr.

Vs.

Denzel Valentine, Michigan State, Sr.

Measurements*

Hield 

Height in Shoes: 6-4.5, Weight: 215, Wingspan: 6-8.5, Reach: N/A Age: 22

Valentine

Height in Shoes: 6-5.5, Weight: 223, Wingspan: 6-9.5, Reach: 8-7, Age: 22

Season Stats (as of 2/27)

Hield

34.6 mpg 25.1 ppg 5.5 rpg 2.1 apg 0.4 bpg 1.3 spg 2.9 tpg 2.0 fpg .495 FG% .483 3P% .892 FT%

Valentine

32.5 mpg 19.6 ppg 7.6 rpg 7.3 apg 0.2 bpg 0.9 spg 2.6 tpg 1.8 fpg .473 FG% .451 3P% .845 FT%

Physical Tools

Hield: A little on short side for a shooting guard, but adequate. Very good length that should help make up for so-so height. Could possibly match-up with some small forwards due to length and bulk, though would be at a disadvantage against most bigger 3s. Above-average athlete though not plus, doesn't jump off the page from a explosiveness stand point. Smooth, very co-ordinated.

Valentine: He has very good size and length for a shooting guard, and though he would be on the shorter side for a small forward, he likely would be okay there in some NBA match-ups and might be better there because he can use his strength better. Where Valentine gets dinged is athleticism, though he is smooth, coordinated and fair quick when handling the ball, his vertical and horizontal athleticism appears to be sub-par, particularly his foot speed, which would effect his ability to defend

Shooting and Finishing

Hield: High volume and efficiency shooter, over the last three seasons Hield has shot .408% on 735 three point attempts, though his .483 mark so far this season has skewed the numbers a bit. A .835% free throw shooter. Interestingly, has shot poorly on two-point jumpers the last two seasons, but is undoubtedly and excellent shooter. Off the catch, off the dribble, pulling up, and especially off screens. Is excellent working off the ball to get himself open looks, a natural in the area. Has a quick, compact release. Never lacking in confidence. Shooting, particularly off screens, will likely be his bread and butter in the NBA.

Finishing at the basket, Hield is effective but not entirely explosive, mostly finishing below the rim using length and strength. May struggle some versus length and size while adjusting to better NBA athletes. Hasn't shown anything to suggest he won't at least be an above-average finisher.

Has struggled with questionable shot-selection in the past, somewhat of a gunner at times.

Valentine: Shooting is Valentine's great strength, since his Sophomore year, he has shot .419% on 541 attempts from three and in the last two seasons, he has shot over 40% on two-point jumpers and 82% or better from the line. He is capable of making shots off the dribble, pulling up, spotting up, and coming off of screens.

As a finisher, Valentine uses his length, bulk, and skill to finish, but isn't much of an explosive, above-the-rim finisher. It may take him some time in the NBA to learn how to finish against bigger, long, more athletic players and there is no guarantee he will. Shooting will always be his calling card, but developing and in-between game that will mitigate some of his potential finishing issues would be advantageous.

Valentine could also benefit from a post game. With his bulk and touch, he could be very effective there against shooting guards.

Dribbling

Hield: Comfortable ball-handler, above-average for a shooting guard, though not good enough to function as a primary ball-handler against NBA defensive pressure, though he can certainly improve in this area. Good driving to the rim, able to use both hands. Certainly better with his right, but can use his left driving. Not advanced, but is effective driving straight with a little wiggle. Started his career mostly as a slasher, so has that in his game. Will be most effective attacking off of closeouts.

Valentine: As he plays nominal point guard for Michigan State, Valentine is very comfortable with the ball in his hands. He is able to dribble with his eyes up, which benefits his passing because he is able to see teammates without having to worry about his dribble. Valentine is right-hand dominant though he can use his left, he almost always drive back to his right if he can. On occasion, when given a lane to the left he has driven that way, though he doesn't seem as comfortable doing it as he does going right. Becoming more proficient with his left hand will be crucial once he is in the NBA and facing better more athletic defenders. He doesn't have the handle to function as a primary ballhandler, but should be a plus in a secondary role.

Passing

Hield: A smart player who is capable is making good passes, but just isn't wired that way, Hield is definitely a scorer first-and-foremost. Will occasionally force shots when he should pass, though he has been better in that area of late. In the NBA, Hield will have to be a more willing passer, particularly when the defense is scrambling after an attacked close-out. Very possible with a role change, no longer the alpha dog he is in college, Hield will become a more willing passer, he is definitely a smart player, so it is entirely possible. 

Valentine: This is another area that Valentine really shines, he always keeps his eyes up, looking for teammates. He is especially effective in the open floor with quick hit-ahead passes. The halfcourt, Valentine is mostly looking to drive and kick or find open teammates under the basket. He should be good running pick and roll because he can shoot and handle, but he doesn't do a ton of it at Michigan State. Not the type of player that goes out and runs and offense, more of a give me the ball and let me create type. Should be great as a secondary playmaker and ball-mover when on the floor.

Defense

Hield: Can be a very effect defensive player and has the tools to be very good defending guards, with both lateral quickness and length. However, has struggled with focus and in-attentiveness on that end. The hope is that if as he takes on a lesser role offensively in the NBA, his effort and focus on defense will improve. Due to his length, bulk, and competitiveness Hield should be decent switching onto bigger players on occasion.

Valentine: And here lies the rub with Valentine. For all his excellent as an offensive player, his defense is just as questionable. Valentine simply lacks the foot speed at this time to be effective. During his time at Michigan State, the Spartans frequently rolled help his way. Improving foot speed and horizontal athleticism is far from impossible, especially in the NBA, but it is no guarantee of success. One possible solution would be matching Valentine up against small forwards that would have more trouble blowing by him. He has good bulk and should be able to battle bigger players enough to be effective. As a bench player, which Valentine will likely be, he could also be deployed against shooting guards that are non-threats off the dribble and just spot-up players.

He isn't a very impactful defender either, blocking few shots and creating little in the way of turnovers.

Valentine is also a tough rebounder and provides value in this area.

Intangibles

Hield: Renown for his hard work and how he has improved his game. Appears to be a leader for the Sooners who has willingly taken on the role of the go-to scorer.

Valentine: Appears to be a hard worker and team leader. Has improved in all areas of his offensive game every season in college.

Conclusion

Both Hield and Valentine will be First Team All-Americans this year and are stars in college that project to more role players in the NBA. Both will be shooters first and foremost, but with different added secondary skills, so it depends on what you're looking for. Valentine is a much better distributor and playmaker, while Hield has the physical gifts to be a better defender, an area where Valentine may struggle. Hield has a better chance of being a starter because of his potential defensively, but Valentine is a more versatile offensive player. It is hard to separate the two, but I would say Hield just by a nose because of defense and the potential to be able to play more minutes. Though it is closer than some pundits have it.

*Measurements from 2015 Nike Skills Academy via DraftExpress.com

Follow me at twitter.com/double_tech

2016 NBA Draft: Top 50 Rankings

These rankings try to balance upside and risk, it could be flip-flopped how you like depending on if you value upside or safety. In this draft, which is pretty weak overall as we see it now, I lean toward safety but last year, I leaned upside. It really depends on personal preference and the particular draft. Player comparisons are inherently silly, but they are presented to give you an idea of the style of play, strengths, and weaknesses of each player. The designations of #x scorer or #x creator refers to the players on the floor, not on a team. So Buddy Hield wouldn't be the #2/3 scorer on a team, but of the players on the floor at the time, he could be. Enjoy! 

Tier 1: Potential Perennial All-NBA

None. 

Tier 2: Potential All-Stars

01. Brandon Ingram, SF Duke

Upside: #1/2 scorer, plus defensive player

Risk: Body doesn't develop, lack of plus first step causes issues creating shots

Player Comparison: Rashard Lewis

02. Ben Simmons, PF LSU

Upside: #1 creator, #2/3 scorer, plus rebounder, average defensive player

Risk: Shot never develops, allowing teams to lay off and clog the lane, unable to score in half-court, effort on defense doesn't improve, lack of length leads to poor defense 

Player Comparison: Lamar Odom

Tier 3: Potential Plus Rotation Players

03. Dragan Bender, PF Maccabi Tel Aviv

Upside: Plus-Plus defensive player, #3 scorer

Risk: Body and jump shot don't develop

Player Comparison: Andrei Kirilenko

04. Jaylen Brown, SF California

Upside: Plus defensive player, #2/3 scorer

Risk: Jump shots fails to develop.      

Player Comparison: Justise Winslow

05. Kris Dunn, PG Providence

Upside: #1 creator, Plus-plus defensive player, #3 scorer

Risk: Injuries crop back up, jumpshot never becomes consistent, turnovers 

Player Comparison: bigger Derek Harper

06. Jamal Murray, SG Kentucky

Upside: #2/3 scorer, #2 creator, average defensive player

Risk: Average athleticism limits creation and defense

Player Comparison: Somewhere between O.J. Mayo and D'Angelo Russell

07. Henry Ellenson, PF Marquette

Upside: #2 scorer, plus rebounder, average defensive player

Risk: Jumper never comes around, struggled versus length, below average defensive player

Player Comparison: Nikola Mirotic

08. Jakob Poeltl, C Utah

Upside: Plus defensive player, plus rebounder, #4 scorer

Risk: Post game never translates, skill doesn't develop

Player Comparison: Steven Adams

09. Wade Baldwin IV, PG Vanderbilt

Upside: Plus shooter, Plus defender, #3 scorer,  #1/2 creator

Risk: Fails to grow as a point guard, defensive tools don't turn into production

Player Comparison: Terry Porter

10. Furkan Korkmaz, SG Anadolu Efes

Upside: #2/3 scorer, plus shooter, above-average defender

Risk: Body doesn't develop, skill doesn't translate to NBA

Player Comparison: Kerry Kittles

11. Denzel Valentine, SG Michigan State

Upside: #3 scorer, #2 creator, plus shooter, average defender

Risk: Defensive issue relegate him to limited role

Player Comparison: better passing Matt Harpring

12. Buddy Hield, SG Oklahoma

Upside: #2/3 scorer, plus shooter, above-average defender

Risk: More a 35% three-point shooter than 40%, inattentivness on defense limits playing time

Player Comparison: Lindsey Hunter

13. Marquese Chriss, PF Washington

Upside: #3 scorer, above-average rebounder and defender, plus versatility

Risk: Body doesn't develop, shooting never because a weapon, never puts it all together

Player Comparison: Somewhere between James Michael McAdoo and Antwan Jamison

14. Demetrius Jackson, PG Notre Dame

Upside: #2 creator, above average shooter and defender

Risk: Lack of size/length contributes to defensive struggles, doesn't find scoring/passing balance

Player Comparison: Kyle Lowry

15. Timothe Luwawu, SF Mega Leks

Upside: #3/4 scorer, plus defender

Risk: Shooting improvements aren't for real

Player Comparison: Doug Christie

Tier 4: Potential Rotation Players

16. Ivan Rabb, PF California

Upside: #3/4 big man, above-average defensive player and rebounder

Risk: Body doesn't develop, doesn't develop a dominant skill, never stands out

Player Comparison: Taj Gibson

17. Diamond Stone, C Maryland

Upside: #3/4 big man, above-average rebound, average defender

Risk: Struggles against length/athleticism, passing/feel doesn't develop, defense limits playing time

Player Comparison: Greg Smith

18. Skal Labissiere, PF Kentucky

Upside: #2/3 big man, above-average to plus shooter, above-average defender

Risk: Body never develops, lack of strength and feel make him barely playable

Player Comparison: less skilled David West

19. Petr Cornelie, PF Le Mans

Upside: Backup power forward, plus shooter and plus defender

Risk: Strength and lack of length lead to defensive liabilities

Player Comparison: Channing Frye

23. Taurean Prince, SF Baylor

Upside: 3-and-D combo forward, above-average shooter and defender, plus rebounder

Risk: Shooting and defense don't translate

Player Comparison: Somewhere between Robert Covington and Trevor Ariza

21. Stephen Zimmerman Jr, C UNLV

Upside: #3/4 big man, above-average offensive shooter, rebounder, and defensive player

Risk: No part of his game evolves, leaving a vanilla overall player

Player Comparison: Raef LaFrentz

22. Nigel Hayes, PF Wisconsin

Upside: Backup power forward, plus creator and shooter for a big, above-average defender

Risk: Overmatched against bigger players, shoots more around 30% from three rather than 35%+

Player Comparison: shorter, longer Nikola Mirotic

23. Melo Trimble, PG Maryland

Upside: #3/4 scorer and #2 creator

Risk: Lack of size/length limit offensive and defensive production

Player Comparison: B.J. Armstrong

24. Caris LeVert, SG Michigan

Upside: #3/4 scorer, #2 creator, plus shooter, average defensive player

Risk: Lower body injuries continue to plague his career, aggressiveness 

Player Comparison: Michael Finley

25. Domantas Sabonis, F/C Gonzaga

Upside: #3/4 big man, plus rebounder and finisher, above-average defensive player

Risk: Lack of physical advantages limit defensive upside and ability to finish vs. length

Player Comparison: P.J. Brown

26. Malik Beasley, SG Florida State

Upside: #3/4 scorer, plus shooter, above-average defensive player

Risk: Doesn't develop any in-between game or become more efficient from two point range

Player Comparison: Allen Crabbe

27. Monte Morris, PG Iowa State

Upside: #1 creator and above-average shooter

Risk: Lack of size and length limit defense and ability to finish

Player Comparison: Brian Roberts

28. Patrick McCaw, SG UNLV

Upside: #3/4 scorer, #2 creator, above-average shooter and defensive player

Risk: Body, strength, and shooting don't develop

Player Comparison: Will Barton

Tier 5: Risky, High Reward Prospects

29. Jonathan Jeanne, C Le Mans

Upside: #3 scorer, plus shooter, defensive player, and rebounder

Risk: Frail body doesn't develop, affecting every single aspect of his game

30. Thomas Bryant, C Indiana

Upside: #2/3 big man, plus rebounder, above-average defensive player

Risk: Doesn't improve his feel, pick and roll defense, or shooting

31. A.J. Hammons, C Purdue

Upside: #3 big man, plus rebounder, defensive player, and pick-and-roll player

Risk: Lack of feel and polish lead to underachieving, conditioning issues return

32. Cheick Diallo, C Kansas

Upside: #3/4 big man, plus-plus defensive player

Risk: Lack of polish and offensive game limit minutes severely 

33. Deyonta Davis, PF Michigan State

Upside: #3/4 big man, above-average shooter for a big, plus rebounder and defensive player

Risk: Simply doesn't develop as an offensive or defensive player

34. Paul Zipser, SF Bayern Muenchen

Upside: #3/4 scorer, plus defender, above-average shooter

Risk: Shot doesn't develop or regresses, limiting his ability to drive or score

35. Ante Zizic, C Cibona Zagreb

Upside: #3/4 big man, plus rebounder and defensive player

Risk: Offense doesn't develop enough to play significant minutes

36. Zhou Qi, C Xinjiang

Upside: #2/3 big man, plus defensive player, above-average shooter for a big man

Risk: Frail body doesn't develop, affecting every single aspect of his game, toughness wanes

37. Juan Hernangomez, PF Estudiantes

Upside: #3/4 big man, above-average shooter for a big, average defensive player

Risk: Lack of length and athletic ability limits both offense and defense

Player Comparison:

38. Gary Payton II, Oregon State

Upside: #2 creator, #3/4 scorer, plus-plus defensive player

Risk: Jumper limits offensive upside

 

39. Sviatoslav Mykhailiuk, SG Kansas

Upside: #3/4 scorer, plus shooter, above-average defensive player

Risk: Continues to fail to deliver on abilities

40. Ivica Zubac, C Mega Leks

Upside: #3/4 big man, above-average defensive and pick-and-roll player

Risk: Offense and defense fail to develop to playable levels

Tier 6: Risky, Medium Reward Prospects

41. Chinanu Onuaku, C Louisville

Upside: #3/4 big man, plus defensive player and rebounder

Risk: Lack of offense makes him hard to play

42. Kay Felder, PG Oakland

Upside: #1 creator, plus shooter, average defensive player

Risk: Lack of size limits ability to score and defend

43. Tyler Ulis, PG Kentucky

Upside: #1 creator off bench, above-average shooter and average defensive player

Risk: Lack of size, bulk, and length limit ability to score and defend

44. Justin Jackson, SF North Carolina

Upside: #3 creator, #4 scorer, above-average shooter and defender

Risk: Fails to live up to abilities, continues to be a bad shoot, doesn't mature physically

45. Grayson Allen, SG Duke

Upside: #3/4 scorer, plus shooter, above-average defender

Risk: Doesn't live up to tools and continues to be a poor defender, driving ability doesn't develop

46. Isaiah Briscoe, G Kentucky

Upside: #2 creator, plus defensive player

Risk: Terrible shooting makes him unplayable

47. Brice Johnson, PF North Carolina

Upside: #3/4 big man, plus rebounder, above-average pick-and-roll finisher

Risk: Body fails to develop, lack of defense makes him difficult to play

48. Malik Newman, SG Mississippi State

Upside: #3/4 scorer, plus shooter

Risk: Never becomes more than a one-diamensional gunner that isn't even that good at gunning

49. Jake Layman, PF Maryland

Upside: #3/4 big man, above-average shooter and creator, as a power forward

Risk: Plays more as a wing and doesn't have the ability to score against wings

50. Damian Jones, PF Vanderbilt

Upside: #3/4 big man, plus defensive player

Risk: Lack of feel continues to limit his production and rebounding

Follow me on Twitter @double_tech