2021 NBA Draft Safari

Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Nathan S

33 is the new 23
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
13,096
Reaction score
18,225
Points
123
Post-MM big board. While some NCAA prospects helped their stocks, all of the top international guys have helped their stock a lot in the last month or so.

#1. Sengun. Same reasoning as before...probable MVP in an elite pro league at age 18. And contrary to popular belief, he's doing his damage in a fast-paced modern offense, not in a throwback post-centric offense.

#2/3. Barnes and Mobley, neck and neck. Both elite defensive prospects with great physical tools, though their offensive games have some moderately concerning weaknesses.

#4-10. Suggs, Kuminga, Green, Wagner, Moody, Giddey, Springer

#11-20. Garuba, Prkacin, Boston, McBride, Cunningham, Johnson, Cooper, Robinson-Earl, Butler, Jackson

#11-20:

Garuba

What I like: Defensive versatility, athleticism. A key roleplayer for elite professional team Real Madrid, Garuba has legit potential to switch 1-5. Should be able to contribute right away in the same role.

What I don't like: Offensive development seems to have stalled. Jumper remains inconsistent, and handling/passing skills are just average for a PF. Little potential to create his own offense.

Prkacin

What I like: Shoot/dribble/pass offensive skill. Prkacin has a surprisingly advanced offensive game, especially considering his age (turns 19 in Nov). He also shows good toughness in the paint against grown men.

What I don't like: While he's not a terrible athlete, he doesn't manage to block many shots, and you wouldn't want him strung out on the perimeter either. A tough fit defensively in the NBA.

Boston

What I like: Prototypical 3&D SG. Found his range from 3 after a horror start to the season, and shows nice lateral quickness and anticipation on the defensive end.

What I don't like: Skinny frame and average quickness limit his ability to attack off the dribble. May struggle defensively against more physical players.

McBride

What I like: Point-of-attack defense, PG skills. McBride has a great combination of motor, quickness, anticipation, and toughness to make opposing PGs uncomfortable. A competent, low-mistake floor general on offense.

What I don't like: Not a very skilled ballhandler; makes it tough for him to get high-percentage shots off the dribble. Just average length limits defensive versatility.

Cunningham

What I like: Outside shooting, length and IQ on D. Nice high release, comfortable shooting with a hand in his face. Good anticipation on D, uses length to contain ballhandlers and fill up passing lanes.

What I don't like: Lacks quickness and vertical pop on dribble drives, leading to turnovers and low-percentage shots. Can get pushed around, not a great rebounder despite size.

Johnson

What I like: Frame & athleticism, drive-and-dish potential. Johnson has ideal physical tools for a wing; can be a big-time playmaker on D, dangerous attacking the basket on straight-line drives.

What I don't like: Wheels come off when things aren't going his way, both within games and big picture. Can make 3's, but form and consistency very questionable.

Cooper

What I like: Quickness, poise, and passing ability. Cooper really knows how to run an offense, and is great at using his quickness to create opportunities for himself and his teammates.

What I don't like: Lackluster defender who's a bit undersized to boot. Not a very high percentage shooter, relies heavily on drawing contact which won't be as easy in the NBA.

Robinson-Earl

What I like: Offensive versatility, IQ. Uncanny ability to provide whatever his team needs, whether it's floor spacing, offensive rebounding, passing, etc. Smart team defender.

What I don't like: Jumpshot needs to be a bit more consistent. Just-okay length and athleticism limits defensive upside, may make it difficult for him to finish at the rim in the NBA.

Butler

What I like: Leadership, shooting, point-of-attack D. NBA-ready guard who can run the offense and knock down 3's right away. Active and intelligent defender who generates a lot of steals.

What I don't like: Good-not-great athlete, only okay at creating off the dribble. Probably needs a more athletic, dynamic scoring threat next to him in the backcourt.

Jackson

What I like: Elite paint protection. A natural shot blocker who can really shut down the paint with his length, quickness, and athleticism. Reasonably capable finisher at the rim, decent foul shooter.

What I don't like: Offensive game is very limited and raw. No signs of 3-point range, and attempts at self-creation frequently lead to turnovers or low-percentage shots.
 

I'mWithDan

"Straight Cash Homie"
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
8,633
Reaction score
14,481
Points
123
Thanks to @Nathan S for these numbers.

Similar to Green, my prospect assessment calculation also really likes Giddey.

Both Green and Giddey profile as median 1st round prospects, against pro competition. Impressive for both, as guards, where the bar is high.

Ball was a bit better.......but guys that get to median or above succeed at much higher rates. To do that against pro competition is a pretty strong indicator that both Giddey and Green have profiles that will succeed at high rates as well.

Giddey does it while being a wildly inefficient scorer.....so if he has meaningful improvement there, it is not unreasonable to think he will look a lot like LaMaelo has immediately, as someone who can make an early impact on an NBA roster.

Screen-Shot-2021-04-07-at-2-43-20-PM.png
 

daytripper

Miracle of Richfield
Joined
Jan 23, 2006
Messages
2,433
Reaction score
2,907
Points
113
Call me crazy but this my dream draft. Get a little lucky with the ping pong balls and draft Evan Mobley with our pick. Trade Sexton to the Thunder (i think he'd be a great fit with SGA) and take the best wing on the board with their pick, Kuminga, Barnes, Moody...
No team is trading their high lottery pick in this draft for any of our recent lottery picks esp when Sexton needs to get paid. I'd trade Garland in that scenario but again no team is trading a top 5-6 pick for anyone on our roster. This draft is that good with several potential franchise players. As much as I like both SGA and Sexton they are both suited to be a #2/3 on a high level playoff team.
 
Last edited:

Nathan S

33 is the new 23
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
13,096
Reaction score
18,225
Points
123
Confused as to why so many mocks have Williams above Boston. They're similar in many ways...skilled SG/SF types who were very highly regarded recruits but really struggled to score efficiently this season. The big difference is that Williams additionally was a turnover machine, while Boston was at least okay in that regard. So why are people more bullish on Williams?
 

LeeBuckeye

Sixth Man
Joined
Feb 1, 2016
Messages
1,671
Reaction score
2,102
Points
113
Confused as to why so many mocks have Williams above Boston. They're similar in many ways...skilled SG/SF types who were very highly regarded recruits but really struggled to score efficiently this season. The big difference is that Williams additionally was a turnover machine, while Boston was at least okay in that regard. So why are people more bullish on Williams?

I didn’t watch a ton of regular season college basketball so sorry I can’t contribute but I did find it odd that Kentucky fans rejoiced when Boston declared for the draft. That’s not a good sign.
 

I'mWithDan

"Straight Cash Homie"
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
8,633
Reaction score
14,481
Points
123
I always enjoy digging deep on the guys outside the 1st round (currently), who seem undervalued relative to their profiles.

After about 60 prospects loaded, two guys seem worth paying attention to:

Nah'Shon Hyland
Bennedict Mathurin

Mathurin is a "tools" guy who has already produced. Kind of surprised to see him so low in mocks relative to his size and shooting profile.
 

Nathan S

33 is the new 23
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
13,096
Reaction score
18,225
Points
123
I always enjoy digging deep on the guys outside the 1st round (currently), who seem undervalued relative to their profiles.

After about 60 prospects loaded, two guys seem worth paying attention to:

Nah'Shon Hyland
Bennedict Mathurin

Mathurin is a "tools" guy who has already produced. Kind of surprised to see him so low in mocks relative to his size and shooting profile.

Bones is another guy my draft rater flags for low offensive rebound rate...it projects him as just a replacement-level bench scorer as a result. It likes Mathurin though.
 

RchfldCavRaised

Locker Room Presence
Moderator
Joined
Jan 28, 2007
Messages
10,901
Reaction score
18,309
Points
123
Confused as to why so many mocks have Williams above Boston. They're similar in many ways...skilled SG/SF types who were very highly regarded recruits but really struggled to score efficiently this season. The big difference is that Williams additionally was a turnover machine, while Boston was at least okay in that regard. So why are people more bullish on Williams?

Entirely different players and style, just similar builds. Its like the Sexton/Garland comparison, there is none.

I would compare Williams to Barnes and Boston to Green.

One is do it all with his approach to the game, but just a grade of intensity and about 30 lbs lighter than Barnes. If Zi was stronger and in a style of play that complimented him more, he may have shown better. I'm willing to bet that GM's see him as a guy who has the right approach in attempting to initiate and create for others and getting turnovers that way, and being too light in the britches to finish over some of the men in the PAC10 as a big reason he did not show as well this winter. Personally, I dont think Stanford's coach is very good. I think this is his 4th or 5th year in a row finishing at or about .500 in the conference and feasting on his out of conference schedule. I watched 2 games while Okpala was there and I was confused why he went there instead of UCLA or USC as I felt he was not being put in a position to either maximize his skillset or help his team win.

Boston... scorer. And not an unconscionable scorer when I watch him at Kentucky like Booker, more of a streaky "I need to score early or I'm not giving you much else for the rest of this 40 mins" scorer like Knox or James Young from a few years ago with 3 or 4 more inches. The problem I have with scorers like this are documented in my rants here. You can be that kind of guard if you have the ability AND awareness to get to the rim to get yourself going when the outside shot isnt falling... but you can easily hurt your team more nights than you help if you stubbornly try to shoot your way into a game as a scorer first streaky wing. Even his good games, were just scoring, whereas his bad games (and there were many, Kentucky was counting on him being their blue blood 5 star guy and he showed like a 3 star instead) stood out for his disappearing

The best way I can sum this up

Ziaire has a gravity to his game when on the court. You believe his approach to the game will be conducive to contributing to a winning team and you bank on him adding muscle and the game slowing down for his playmaking as he matures. Also, I believe pro-GM's can see the mediocre coaching.

BJ has no gravity and is totally dependent on scoring as a ISO guy who needs to see the ball go through early to stay engaged AND gets overwhelmed and checks out when he cant get his footing in his scoring exploits. He COULD be coached to impact the game with his immense and ideal length, skill and athleticism but there is more that contributed to him looking bad this year on a more talented Kentucky team than just adding muscle and coaching, like I believe hurt Williams.
 

Nathan S

33 is the new 23
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
13,096
Reaction score
18,225
Points
123
Entirely different players and style, just similar builds. Its like the Sexton/Garland comparison, there is none.

I would compare Williams to Barnes and Boston to Green.

One is do it all with his approach to the game, but just a grade of intensity and about 30 lbs lighter than Barnes. If Zi was stronger and in a style of play that complimented him more, he may have shown better. I'm willing to bet that GM's see him as a guy who has the right approach in attempting to initiate and create for others and getting turnovers that way, and being too light in the britches to finish over some of the men in the PAC10 as a big reason he did not show as well this winter. Personally, I dont think Stanford's coach is very good. I think this is his 4th or 5th year in a row finishing at or about .500 in the conference and feasting on his out of conference schedule. I watched 2 games while Okpala was there and I was confused why he went there instead of UCLA or USC as I felt he was not being put in a position to either maximize his skillset or help his team win.

Boston... scorer. And not an unconscionable scorer when I watch him at Kentucky like Booker, more of a streaky "I need to score early or I'm not giving you much else for the rest of this 40 mins" scorer like Knox or James Young from a few years ago with 3 or 4 more inches. The problem I have with scorers like this are documented in my rants here. You can be that kind of guard if you have the ability AND awareness to get to the rim to get yourself going when the outside shot isnt falling... but you can easily hurt your team more nights than you help if you stubbornly try to shoot your way into a game as a scorer first streaky wing. Even his good games, were just scoring, whereas his bad games (and there were many, Kentucky was counting on him being their blue blood 5 star guy and he showed like a 3 star instead) stood out for his disappearing

The best way I can sum this up

Ziaire has a gravity to his game when on the court. You believe his approach to the game will be conducive to contributing to a winning team and you bank on him adding muscle and the game slowing down for his playmaking as he matures. Also, I believe pro-GM's can see the mediocre coaching.

BJ has no gravity and is totally dependent on scoring as a ISO guy who needs to see the ball go through early to stay engaged AND gets overwhelmed and checks out when he cant get his footing in his scoring exploits. He COULD be coached to impact the game with his immense and ideal length, skill and athleticism but there is more that contributed to him looking bad this year on a more talented Kentucky team than just adding muscle and coaching, like I believe hurt Williams.

I guess based on this, I can see Ziaire being a higher-ceiling lower-floor guy than Boston. He could succeed...IF his playmaking goes from a negative to a positive. I really didn't like what I saw from him in that regard; in particular, a lot of his passes just had no zip to them at all. Those passes are sitting ducks against long, athletic NBA defenses. Sure, maybe he could improve his passes to be quicker and more precise, but that's like asking a shooter to develop a quicker, higher release...easy in theory, difficult to do in reality. I can't imagine asking either of these guys to participate in running an NBA offense.

I love the Boston/Green comparison. Boston is pretty much Green without the ability to reliably attack the basket. Keep him in a primarily off-ball role, and he could get hot and make 4-6 threes on any given night. A JR Smith kind of role. Ziaire is not quite as good a shooter, I feel, and I personally don't have much faith that he's going to make up for it with his floor game.
 

MirORich

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
20,648
Reaction score
30,255
Points
148
Here’s one oldshcool media draftniks current big board


Short pro and con paragraphs for each player but here is the plain list for those who don’t want to click through:
1. Cade Cunningham
2. Evan Mobley
3. Jalen Suggs
4. Jalen Green
5. Jonathan Kuminga
6. Davion Mitchell
7. Franz Wagner
8. Keon Johnson
9. Scottie Barnes
10. Jalen Johnson
11. Josh Giddey
12. Kai Jones
13. Moses Moody
14. Corey Kispert
15. Sharife Cooper
16. Greg Brown
17. Isaiah Jackson
18. James Bouknight
19. Jared Butler
20. Jaden Springer
21. Cameron Thomas
22. Chris Duarte
23. Ziaire Williams
24. Tre Mann
25. Johnny Juzang
26. Aleperen Sengun(says some teams have him in lotto, others below 30)
27. Marcus Bagley
28. Matthew Mayer
29. Usman Garuba
30. Dayron Sharpe
 
Last edited:

KilgoreTrout

All-Star
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
15,353
Reaction score
9,450
Points
113
Here’s one oldshcool media draftniks current big board


Short pro and con paragraphs for each player but here the plain list for those who don’t want to click through:
1. Cade Cunningham
2. Evan Mobley
3. JaLen Suggs
4. Jalen Green
5. Jonathan Kuminga
6. Davion Mitchell
7. Franz Wagner
8. Keon Johnson
9. Scottie Barnes
10. Jalen Johnson
11. Josh Giddey
12. Kai Jones
13. Moses Moody
14. Corey Kisoert
15. Sharife Cooper
16. Greg Brown
17. Isaiah Jackson
18. James Bouknight
19. Jared Butler
20. Jaden Springer
21. Cameron Thomas
22. Chris Duarte
23. Ziaire Williams
24. Tre Mann
25. Johnny Juzang
26. Aleperen Sengun(says some teams have him in lotto, others below 30)
27. Marcus Bagley
28. Matthew Mayer
29. Usman Garuba
30. Dayron Sharpe
I hadn’t ever seen Mitchell that high, but given our love of short guards, he sure looks like the pick for US, no?
 

KilgoreTrout

All-Star
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
15,353
Reaction score
9,450
Points
113
Here’s one oldshcool media draftniks current big board


Short pro and con paragraphs for each player but here is the plain list for those who don’t want to click through:
1. Cade Cunningham
2. Evan Mobley
3. Jalen Suggs
4. Jalen Green
5. Jonathan Kuminga
6. Davion Mitchell
7. Franz Wagner
8. Keon Johnson
9. Scottie Barnes
10. Jalen Johnson
11. Josh Giddey
12. Kai Jones
13. Moses Moody
14. Corey Kispert
15. Sharife Cooper
16. Greg Brown
17. Isaiah Jackson
18. James Bouknight
19. Jared Butler
20. Jaden Springer
21. Cameron Thomas
22. Chris Duarte
23. Ziaire Williams
24. Tre Mann
25. Johnny Juzang
26. Aleperen Sengun(says some teams have him in lotto, others below 30)
27. Marcus Bagley
28. Matthew Mayer
29. Usman Garuba
30. Dayron Sharpe
Juzang SOARING up those boards!

Today at 25, tomorrow at 15, #5 the next day!
 

adam81king

Sixth Man
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
1,229
Reaction score
1,450
Points
113
Here’s one oldshcool media draftniks current big board


Short pro and con paragraphs for each player but here is the plain list for those who don’t want to click through:
1. Cade Cunningham
2. Evan Mobley
3. Jalen Suggs
4. Jalen Green
5. Jonathan Kuminga
6. Davion Mitchell
7. Franz Wagner
8. Keon Johnson
9. Scottie Barnes
10. Jalen Johnson
11. Josh Giddey
12. Kai Jones
13. Moses Moody
14. Corey Kispert
15. Sharife Cooper
16. Greg Brown
17. Isaiah Jackson
18. James Bouknight
19. Jared Butler
20. Jaden Springer
21. Cameron Thomas
22. Chris Duarte
23. Ziaire Williams
24. Tre Mann
25. Johnny Juzang
26. Aleperen Sengun(says some teams have him in lotto, others below 30)
27. Marcus Bagley
28. Matthew Mayer
29. Usman Garuba
30. Dayron Sharpe

Clearly this person values the NCAA tournament...
 

Nathan S

33 is the new 23
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
13,096
Reaction score
18,225
Points
123
Added several more 2nd-round types to my draft rater

Good value: Marcus Carr, Max Abmas

Pretty solid: Moses Wright, Jose Alvarado, Matthew Mayer, Vrenz Bleijenbergh, Khalifa Diop

Meh: Trey Murphy, Matt Mitchell, McKinley Wright, Andrew Nembhard, Gabriele Procida, Amar Sylla, Malcolm Cazalon

Nope: Kessler Edwards, Santi Aldama, Sam Hauser, Carlos Alocen, Ibou Badji, Nikita Mikhailovskii, Mario Nakic
 

I'mWithDan

"Straight Cash Homie"
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
8,633
Reaction score
14,481
Points
123
Added several more 2nd-round types to my draft rater

Max Abmas

Max is someone who looks good across the board to me as well. I added 10 or so guys last night and he was the only good value type.

I’ll have to add some of these other guys you listed. I see a pretty big cliff in this draft around the early to mid second. I think the top 40-45 has a ton of quality......but after about 75 prospects entered, it strangely lacks the number of interesting later round / UDFA types like a Paul Reed from last year.
 

RCF Reserves

Total amount
$245.00
Top