# Economics professor takes a look at the "clutch" debate

One of the key questions of the statistical movement, both in baseball and in basketball, is whether or not “clutch” performance exists. Most casual fans and basketball cognoscenti are absolutely positive that some players have the capacity to raise their game when it matters most, and other players tend to shrink in those same situations.

Meanwhile, stat geeks keep trying to find evidence that supports that theory, but can’t seem to do it. Hundreds of thousands of words have been written on this subject, with 99.7% of those words generally being dismissed by casual fans who believe in their own opinion and don’t want to be told otherwise. Examples have been given, studies have been done, and respected basketball experts have been told to “watch the games” countless times.

Dan Ariely, a professor of behavioral economics at the MIT Sloan School of Management, is the latest respected academic to add his two cents to the “clutch” debate. Here are some excerpts from Ariely’s essay, which was originally published on the Huffington Post:
With the help of Duke University men’s basketball Coach Mike Krzyzewski (“Coach K”), we got a group of professional coaches to identify clutch players in the NBA (the coaches agreed, to a large extent, about who is and who is not a clutch player). Next, we watched videos of the twenty most crucial games for each clutch player in an entire NBA season (by most crucial, we meant that the score difference at the end of the game did not exceed three points).
For each of those games, we measured how many points the clutch players had shot in the last five minutes of the first half of each game, when pressure was relatively low. Then we compared that number to the number of points scored during the last five minutes of the game, when the outcome was hanging by a thread and stress was at its peak. We also noted the same measures for all the other “nonclutch” players who were playing in the same games…
…We found that the non-clutch players scored more or less the same in the low-stress and high-stress moments, whereas there was actually a substantial improvement for clutch players during the last five minutes of the games…
…we looked separately at whether the clutch players actually shot better or just more often. As it turned out, the clutch players did not improve their skill; they just tried many more times. Their field goal percentage did not increase in the last five minutes (meaning that their shots were no more accurate); neither was it the case that non- clutch players got worse.

Before you criticize Ariely’s findings, please read the full essay, which gives much more context and deals with many of the knee-jerk reactions against his study. On the surface, the finding makes sense; other than some very rare positive exceptions (Derek Fisher, Robert Horry) and some negative exceptions (Carter, Vince), the players who are considered the most “clutch” players in basketball are also the best overall players. Michael Jordan was the best player ever in the last two minutes of a game; he was also the best player ever in the first 46 minutes of a game.

No study that attempts to distill something as nebulous as “clutch” play into a science will ever be 100% perfect, but work like Ariely’s and “clutch” stats like the ones kept by 82games.com are great jumping-off points to advance the level of discussion about NBA basketball. By utilizing research and resources like those, it’s possible to use facts where there was once only conjecture. Of course, there’s always the option to talk about “clutch” players like we do now: decide who’s clutch and who isn’t relatively early in a player’s career, play up the examples where those players do come up big, and ignore the times when they don’t.

## After trading Jimmy Butler to Minnesota, where do the Bulls go from here?

Getty

Jimmy Butler is now a member of the Minnesota Timberwolves. In a draft day trade, the Timberwolves received Jimmy Butler and reunited him with his old coach from Chicago Tom Thibodeau. In exchange for the shooting guard, the Chicago Bulls received the No. 7 overall pick — Chicago took Arizona’s Lauri MarkkanenKris Dunn, and Zach LaVine.

The question now in Chicago is this: now what?

Butler, 27, was the superstar the Bulls needed post-Derrick Rose. Now, with Butler gone, the Bulls will need to rebuild in a year in which they have young assets mixed with older, more expensive players that don’t seem to match up. After a year in which Chicago just barely made the playoffs with the eight seed, they are going to need to readjust their entire roster. That could mean new landing places for Rajon Rondo, Dwyane Wade, and Robin Lopez.

Forget on the on-floor performance for a moment, the real question for Chicago will be how to properly allocate their resources when it comes to salary in the coming season. Wade, 35, will reportedly opt into the final year of his contract to play for his hometown team despite Butler moving to Minnesota. Chicago will earn the right to pay Wade \$23.8 million for this upcoming season. Rondo is in much the same boat, with \$13.4 million left in the final year of his contract.

From a wins perspective, both players would no doubt be highly crucial to any wins this new Bulls team would garner in the coming season. But both players have a staggering amount of salary left, and would no doubt take up valuable playing time for the young, newly acquired players that the Bulls should want to develop.

The most obvious choice for both Rondo and Wade would be waivers or buyouts. Rondo’s contract only has \$3 million left on it if he is bought out before June 30. Despite a solid playoff performance, Rondo does not have a \$13 million value to the Bulls in terms of playing time, and they don’t have a need for whatever erratic play he may bring to the table.

While the Butler trade created a \$15.3 million exception for the Bulls, Wade’s contract stands as an albatross that is in the way of both free agency this season and extensions for young players in the coming season. Chicago is facing restricted free agency for Nikola Mirotic come July, and will need to figure out what to do with younger players like Michael Carter-Williams and Cristiano Felicio.

After decisions are made this summer for those players, the Bulls will need to figure out how to sign LaVine to an extension. Given the market for players of his caliber and position, LaVine will almost certainly command a number comparable to what Wade’s salary currently occupies on the Chicago cap space.

This is all before we even get to Lopez, who has \$26 million left on his contract for the next two seasons. While he is still a productive player, at age 29 it’s unclear at how much Lopez factors into Chicago’s future plans. Given his contract situation it might be better to try to move him as a means to acquire new assets that are closer in age to the Bulls’ new core.

If your head is not spinning by now, you’re one of the lucky ones. It just gets worse from here.

It seems highly probable that Rondo will be waived or bought out in order to minimize the impact he has on the cap this season. He doesn’t glean much on the trade market given his current full contract value, and his an uneasy play (despite his playoff prowess) is something that that has driven potential trade suitors away.

What to do with Wade is an entirely different conversation. If Chicago decided to buy him out this summer it would be a clear choice of direction in terms of both the roster makeup and the playing time allotted to the new young backcourt at the United Center. The Bulls would immediately become ultra flexible, and able to match a restricted offer for Mirotic without fearing any kind of retribution down the line for when they try to sign other players in free agency or offer LaVine an extension.

Then again, they could wait to buy him out until later in the season, say, around the All-Star Game, all the while taking in ticket sales for Chicago fans to see their hometown star. There is no doubt that Wade would be a good influence on younger players in the locker room, despite the high price tag. If they want to buy him out later in the season, he could join another team in time for a playoff run. That might convince Wade to take a larger amount off of his contract come buyout time.

Lost in the sauce of all this contract talk is just what the Bulls are doing with their future. LaVine looked excellent before his ACL injury in 2016-17, and Dunn had promise despite a disappointing first season in Minnesota. By all accounts, the Bulls gave up too much in their trade with the Timberwolves, with most lamenting their decision to send the No. 16 pick to Minnesota despite Chicago giving up the best player in the swap.

There’s also the matter of the Bulls trading Jordan Bell to the Golden State Warriors straight up for cash considerations. Bell was an excellent player at Oregon, and would have a fit right in with Chicago’s new young core. Given that there is an issue with the Chicago front line when it comes to Mirotic’s RFA contract and Felicio’s free agency, the idea that Bell would not have fit in with the young Bulls is sort of baffling.

Yes, Chicago selected Lauri Markkanen with the No. 7 overall pick, but the University of Arizona product is not projected to be enough of a influence to suggest Bell had to be moved. Bell is almost certainly getting sent to the G-League for the Warriors, but he could have played a role for a team in Chicago that needs theirs defined. If the Butler trade was symbolic of their new direction, perhaps the Bell-for-cash swap was most emblematic of how the Bulls do business.

At the end of the day, Chicago’s trade with Minnesota sending Butler back to Thibodeau feels hilariously lopsided, and pushes the full reset for the Bulls in the years since Rose, Joakim Noah, and Taj Gibson led the team. Unless either LaVine, Markkanen, or Dunn exceed Butler’s performance for Chicago, it’s unlikely that history will look kindly at this trade. When the Bulls brought in Wade and Rondo last season, it looked like the team that once challenged in the Eastern Conference had started their decline. Once Rondo and Wade are gone, we’re likely to see the bottom for Chicago.

## 2017 NBA Draft pick-by-pick tracker with analysis of each move

Associated Press

Already the 2017 NBA Draft has been crazy — the No. 1 pick was traded for only the seventh time in NBA history. The No. 2 pick from a couple years ago has already been moved to make way for the next No. 2 pick coming to Los Angeles.

Now it is likely to get even wilder.

This is the best place to follow all of it. Just keep hitting refresh all night.

We will constantly be updating this post throughout the course of the night — it will be live with a quick analysis of every pick and how they fit in with the team that took them. We’ll also be on top of trades and everything else happening around the NBA tonight. About the only thing we know is what’s happening now with the No. 1 pick, so let’s put the Sixers on the clock.

1. Philadelphia 76ers: Markelle Fultz, 6’4” point guard (Washington). The Sixers hope they have their big three rounded out with Fultz. One scout I trust told me this was a one-player draft at the top — Fultz was clear and away the best guy available. What doesn’t he do well offensively? He can score off the pick-and-roll from all three levels: He makes threes, can hit mid-range pull-ups, or attack and finish above the rim. He can make plays in transition, makes good decisions off the pick-and-roll, uses both hands, and had great body control and footwork. The concerns are he can be passive, lets the game come to him a little too much, and can be a lazy defender (despite elite physical tools). Stlll, he was the clear No. 1 for a reason.

2. Los Angeles Lakers: Lonzo Ball, 6’6” point guard (UCLA). You can’t teach his court vision and passing skills, which remind one of a LeBron/Ricky Rubio level of passer. With those skills, he is amazing in the open court. Yes, his shot is awkward (because of it he can’t pull up going to his right well), but in catch-and-shoots the ball goes in. Concerns about his shot – and his father — are overblown. The real questions are how he defends at the next level (he was disinterested for long stretches in college), and can he create in the halfcourt (he didn’t do a lot of pick-and-rolls, and on them 75 percent of his drives ended with a pass, he has to be more of a scoring threat).

WE HAVE A TRADE: The Chicago Bulls are sending Jimmy Butler to play with his old coach Tom Thibodeau in Minnesota.

Minnesota gets Butler plus the 16th pick in this draft in exchange for Zach LaVine, Kris Dunn, and the No. 7 pick in this draft. That is a great deal for Minnesota. They now can start Ricky Rubio, Jimmy Butler, Andrew Wiggins, Karl-Anthony Towns, and they look like a playoff team.

3. Boston Celtics: Jayson Tatum, 6’8” forward (Duke). Maybe the player most ready to contribute offensively immediately in this draft, Tatum is a fantastic isolation scorer. He has a diverse offensive skill set, and he blew by bigger defenders in college with a strong face-up game, but will that translate to the NBA where everyone is more athletic? Can he score against NBA wings? His perimeter shot is improved but needs to get better still. He also was not a consistent defender in college, he needs to be much better now, especially if he wants to play much for Brad Stevens. Still, this guy can help right now, which is good for Boston.

4. Phoenix Suns: Josh Jackson, 6’8” forward (Kansas). Physically, and with his explosiveness, he reminds one a little of Andrew Wiggins — and Jackson has the same issue of a very inconsistent shot. Effort is a skill and one Jackson has plenty of, he outworks everyone, and could become and elite wing defender in the NBA. He had success offensively in college overwhelming opponents as a small-ball four, and he works well off the ball with cuts or getting out in transition. While his shot found a groove late in the season he needs more consistent mechanics, that shot needs work. Plenty of scouts think he has one of highest potential ceiling in this class.

5. Sacramento Kings: De’Aaron Fox, 6’4” point guard (Kentucky). Kings’ fans, check out our feature on Fox to learn more about him. He climbed draft boards through the season and more once he got to workouts. Fox is incredibly fast with and without the ball — elite NBA level fast, and that makes him dangerous, particularly in transition. He’s a good (not great) passer, but his shot needs work (reports from workouts are that it is improving). He is a good defender (just ask Lonzo Ball) with the potential to be great. He needs to get stronger, and he needs to polish his offensive game, particularly running the pick-and-roll.

6. Orlando Magic: Jonathan Isaac, 6’11” forward (Florida State). One of the highest ceilings in this draft — if he can be developed. He can hit threes, but is very raw and needs confidence on that end. Maybe of more interest to the Magic, his floor is pretty high thanks to his defense — he had a 25% defensive rebound percentage, a 2.4 percent steal rate, and a 6 percent block percentage, only done by Anthony Davis, Andre Roberson, Dewayne Dedmon, and Aaric Murray since 09-10 (stat via Sam Vecenie). He’s a project but could be a key part of the future new management in Orlando is trying to build.

7. Chicago Bulls (via Minnesota in Butler trade): Lauri Markkanen, 7’0” power forward/center (Arizona). The Bulls need shooting and they get it here. Markkanen is a stretch 4/5 who shot 42.3 percent from three — and not just spot-ups. He can come off screens, is dangerous in pick-n-pops, and can just generally shoot the rock. He needs to get stronger, and become a much better rebounder and defender. If he doesn’t, he’s kind of a Ryan Anderson type. Is only third player from Finland ever to make NBA.

8. New York Knicks: Frank Ntilikina, 6’5” point guard (France). He’s a big point guard with length, and in international tournaments he has been a defensive force. That caught scouts’ eyes, but so did his ability to run the team. He has shown development on the offensive end with an improved jumper. His game needs polish, and there are questions about his ceiling, but with his size and defense his floor is higher than some others in this draft range. We’ll see how he fits in the triangle, but he’s a high IQ player.

9. Dallas Mavericks: Dennis Smith Jr., 6’3” point guard (North Carolina State). Dallas needed a point guard and they may have the one of the fututre. He had an inconsistent season, but the good news is he didn’t lose any athleticism from the ACL injury a couple of years back. He’s a powerful and explosive scorer, he’s talented in open floor, an impressive playmaker, and on paper has all the skills you want at the point. However, his decision making is very inconsistent — he chooses passes poorly, picks up his dribble at poor times — plus he’s got to be much better defensively.

WE HAVE A TRADE: Sacramento is rebuilding and wants to restock, Portland needs a big who can space the floor behind (and next to maybe) Jusuf Nurkic, so we have a trade.

10. Portland Trail Blazers (from Sacramento via trade): Zach Collins, 7’0” forward/center (Gonzaga). Few climbed the draft board more in the past month than Collins. Big men who can space the floor are in demand, and he shot 45 percent from three this season. He also was fantastic against elite players in the NCAA Final Four, which helped his cause. He’s got to get stronger to be able to handle NBA players on the defensive end. Also, he’s not athletic or fleet of foot, so if teams can draw him defensively out on the perimeter it’s an issue. Still, big men who can shoot the rock are the way the league is going and he can do it.

11. Charlotte Hornets: Malik Monk, 6’3” shooting guard (Kentucky). While he can be streaky, he’s an insane scorer and athlete who can fill it up like nobody else in this draft. How he will fit off the ball with Kemba Walker is a question mark (especially defensively, but he can get them buckets. The question is can he do anything other than score? He’s not been much of a defender (and he’s a bit small for an NBA two guard), he’s not a shot creator for others, nor does he rebound much. He’s kind of a scoring, volume-shooting sixth man kind of guy, think Jamal Crawford or Lou Williams.

12. Detroit Pistons: Luke Kennard, 6’6” shooting guard (Duke). Maybe the best pure shooter in this draft. More than just spot up, he can read screens, he’s got excellent footwork and jab series, and he’s better on the P’n’R than people realize. He’s not a great athlete so there are questions about his ability to create space for his shot. However, the bigger questions are about his defense and ability to hang with two guards at the next level (he’s not a great athlete, nor is he long).

WE HAVE A TRADE: Denver has traded the No. 13 pick the Utah Jazz

13. Utah Jazz (from Denver via trade): Donovan Mitchell, 6’3” shooting guard (Louisville). He’s a bit time athlete, with a 6’10” wingspan, and with all that he defends very well. That should get him run as a rookie. He has improved as a play maker, but what is his role — he was at his best last season when the Louisville PG was out injured and Mitchell had the ball in his hands. His decision making and shooting need to get far more consistent.

14. Miami Heat: Bam Adebayo, 6’10” center (Kentucky). He’s a little small for an NBA center, but he’s physically strong enough to hold his own in the post. Defensively he’s not much of a rim protector, but if you drag him out into a pick-and-roll he can switch and defend guards well. Very limited offensive game, it’s all dunks that he gets in transition or on offensive rebounds, he’s improved on the glass and is solid there now.

15. Sacramento Kings (via trade with Portland): Justin Jackson, 6’8” small forward (North Carolina). An All-American wing with an all-around game — including drawing some of the toughest defensive assignments for the Tar Heels. He can shoot the three, hits from the midrange, is good on the catch-and-shoot now, and has as impressive a floater as you will see. The concerns at the next level are he needs to get stronger, plus he’s not a great pick-and-roll ball handler.

16. Minnesota Timberwolves (via trade with Chicago): Justin Patton, 7’0” center (Creighton). He’s got good tools — he’s a fantastic aathlete for his size and can rim run with the best — but is a project. He put up good offensive numbers but can’t create for himself, so when Creighton lost its point guard his production took a hit. The big questions are about toughness — will he play through contact? Will he be a physical defender? Plenty of potential but plenty of work to do.

17. Milwaukee Bucks: D.J. Wilson, 6’10” power forward (Michigan). He had flashes last season that make him an intriguing prospect as a stretch-four. He has the size and perimeter skills, was a fantastic finisher around the basket, but was a late bloomer who battled injuries, so it can be hard to read his potential. He’s not physical and with that, not much of a rebounder. He’s going to have to show more toughness to thrive at the next level.

18. Indiana Pacers:. T.J. Leaf, 6’10” power forward (UCLA). A fluid athlete who excelled in transition (and thrived with Lonzo Ball’s passing), he will thrive with an up-tempo team. He also shot 46.6% from three, but didn’t take many, still he could develop into a stretch four. The questions are will he grow his game to work in a half-court offense, and how he will defend (he’s not quick laterally, nor is he physical)? He’s not a bad rebounder. Could thrive with a running second unit while he develops.

19. Atlanta Hawks: John Collins, 6’10” power forward (Wake Forest). He is a young sophomore, which is good because it means he can develop — and he needs to. He’s become an extremely efficient offensive weapon — 67% true shooting percentage, highest PER in college — who is fantastic in the post, but can he pass? He pulled down defensive rebounds, but he’s not long and scouts question if he is a defensive playmaker. He didn’t seem to have much feel for the game on that side of the ball (which often led to foul trouble).

20. Sacramento Kings (via trade with Portland): Harry Giles, 6’11’ center (Duke). He was the highest-ranked freshman in his class, then the injuries hit — ACL, MCL and Meniscus tears in his left knee that have required a couple of surgeries, plus another surgery on his right knee. Is he broken now? Or, because of all the missed time did that just set back his skill development, confidence, and understanding of where to be on the court (particularly on defense). Find his old physical self, then restore his confidence, and this could be the steal of the draft. But he may never be the same again.

21. Oklahoma City Thunder: Terrance Ferguson, 6’7” shooting guard (born in US, played last season in Australia). He’s an athletic wing player who decided to get paid to play overseas rather than play college ball stateside. He was a very good shooter, particularly spot up, in high school, but he struggled a little with that overseas (31.3% from three last year). That said he was handed a big role in a league with men and played well. His ball handling has to improve, and he needs to get stronger, and he needs to be more consistent on defense.

22. Brooklyn Nets: Jarrett Allen, 6’11” center (Texas). With Brook Lopez traded, Allen is going to get some run. If you like tall, wildly athletic but incredibly raw big men, Allen is your guy. He may be the definition of project big. He has all the physical tools to be a Clint Capela kind of player, but does he love basketball enough to put in the work and get there? It’s a little hard to read his college production numbers because he was paired with another non-shooting big on a team without the ability to space the floor. Still, he could rim run in transition, and develop into a good pick-and-roll big.

23. Toronto Raptors: O.G. Anunoby, 6’8” forward (Indiana). On paper he’s everything NBA teams look for in big wings: Can play the 3 or 4, is an elite level defender (when focused), he can make threes (when given time to set his feet), and he’s super athletic. Maybe he develops into a Trevor Ariza type. The questions start with how he comes off an ACL injury. His jumper needs to be more consistent, he hit threes (36% in college) but shot 52% from the free throw line, which is a concern. The other big question is how hard he plays night in and night out — it wasn’t consistent in college.

24. Denver Nuggets (via trade with Utah Jazz): Tyler Lydon, 6’10 forward (Syracuse). He shot 39.2% from three last season, so the logical conclusion is he should be a stretch four in the NBA. He can also run the floor in transition, and post up smaller defenders, but his jumper is his best weapon. The problem is he’s not particularly long nor particularly athletic for an NBA stretch four. There are questions about his defense, particularly coming out of the Syracuse zone. Scouts were really divided on Lydon and if his game translates.

WE HAVE A TRADE: Philadephia jumps back into the first round to get a quality big man who could back up Joel Embiid.

25. Philadelphia 76ers (via trade with Orlando): Anzejs Pasecniks, 7’2” center (Latvia). Just because he’s a 7’2” center from Latvia, don’t think he’s the next Kristaps Porzingis. That said, he’s good. Pasecniks played well and was very efficient last season in Spain, the second best league in the world. He moves well for a big man which makes him dangerous as the roll man. He’s got work to do on his outside shot, but there is potential there. He’s a bit raw but this could be steal this low if he develops.

26. Portland Trail Blazers: Caleb Swanigan, 6’9” power forward/center (Purdue). He transformed his body losing more than 100 pounds, and with that transformed himself into an NBA prospect. He’s strong and bullied people in the post on offense, plus he shot 44.7 percent from three. Teams like his work ethic. That said he’s not fast, he turns the ball over far too much, he’s not strong on the defensive end, and all of that leads to questions of where he fits in an NBA game. He’s young and has room to improve.

27. Los Angeles Lakers (via trade with Brooklyn): Kyle Kuzma, 6’9” power forward (Utah). He has the physical tools of a modern NBA four, with his 7-foot wingspan, versatile offensive game, he can play in transition, and he passes well. He’s not a bad three-point shooter (32 percent last year) but he has to be better to thrive in the NBA. He’s also got to be much better defensively. Kuzma has potential, but it’s going to take work on his part to thrive at the next level.

WE HAVE A TRADE: Utah traded away a late first round pick, now they pick up another one.

28. Utah Jazz (from LA Lakers via trade): Tony Bradley, 6’10” center (North Carolina). He was stuck behind some older, more experienced big men at North Carolina, limiting him to14.5 minutes per game this season, and he’s seen as a bit of a project. He’s tall, long (7’5” wingspan), plays with a high motor, and has a nice shooting stroke. However, he’s not a fantastic athlete, which worries teams. He could be a candidate for a two-way contract, but either way, he likely will spend time in the G-League developing next season.

29. San Antonio Spurs:. Derrick White,6’5” guard (Colorado). One of the best stories in the draft: he had no D1 college offers and just one D2, but he grew five inches at D2 school and eventually transferred to Colorado, only to make first team all Pac-12. He’s a combo guard who shot 40% from three and had 4.3 assists per game – he can shoot and create. He’s got a 6’8” wingspan which helps him make plays on defense. He’s a 23-year-old senior who may not develop much more than what we see early, but he could provide solid minutes off the bench as a rookie.

30. Los Angeles Lakers (via trade with Utah): Josh Hart, 6’5” shooting guard (Villanova). You may remember him from Villanova’s title run, he entered the draft last year but pulled out and returned to college. He improved his shooting, knocking down 40 percent from three last season, although he’s a spot-up guy not someone who pulls up off the dribble. He works well off screens. He’s a high IQ player. The challenge for him is he’s an average athlete by NBA standards, on offense will he be able to create space for his shot? Defensively he tries hard, he’s intense, but can he hang with better athletes night in and night out?

SECOND ROUND

31. Charlotte Hornets (via Atlanta in Dwight Howard trade): Frank Jackson, 6’4” shooting guard (Duke). Update: Jackson has been traded to the New Orleans Pelicans. Mike Krzyzewski’s team was loaded with quality shooting guards last season, but Jackson’s skills carved out a niche and 10.9 points per game. He’s got good length (6’7” wingspan) and is an explosive athlete (42 inch vertical) that helps him create space. He shot 39.5 percent from three but is more dangerous when he attacks straight line off the dribble because he’s strong and can finish. He’s not a playmaker for others, just himself, and there are questions about his defense going against other good athletes at the NBA level.

32. Phoenix Suns: Davon Reed, 6’6″ shooting guard (Miami of Florida). He has the potential to be a quality “3&D” guy in the NBA. Defensively he has a 7-foot wingspan and put in a lot of effort at the defensive end in college, and he’s the kind of fluid athlete NBA teams want. The senior shot 37.9 percent from three last season. The question is will he be athletic enough to do all that at the NBA level. Teams weren’t sure and that’s why he fell this far, plus as a senior there are questions about how much he develops.

33. Orlando Magic: Wesley Iwundu, 6’7” shooting guard/wing (Kansas State). There are some things to like such as good size and length for a wing (7’1” wingspan), he’s got handles and can create shots, maybe even play some point, and he’s versatile defensively and can switch. He’s also a senior, so he’s older and farther along the development curve, he lacks polish on offense. Also, while he shot 37.6 percent from three, he needs consistency on shot. Can he get strong enough to defend NBA wings?

34. Sacramento Kings: Frank Mason, 6’0” point guard (Kansas). The 2017 College Basketball Player of the Year, he averaged 20.3 points per game and shot 47.1 percent from three. He’s explosive attacking the rim, he can score a variety of ways, and he’s a strong floor general. Why is he being taken this late? Because he’s 6-foot in shoes, and there are real questions about how much that limits him on defense. He also needs to be a more consistent decision maker. He could be a steal this late as a second-team playmaking point guard.

35. Orlando Magic: Ivan Rabb, 6’10” power forward/center (California). He’s this year’s cautionary tale: last year he was a potential lottery pick, certainly first rounder, yet he returned to Cal without testing the draft waters, and he fell way down the board because he didn’t show much improvement. He averaged 14 points a game, shot 40 percent from three, and can be a beast on the boards, but it can be hard to read his potential out of the mess that was the Cal offense. Is he a four or a five?

36. Philadelphia 76ers: Jonah Bolden, 6’10” power forward (Australia). He played a little at UCLA a year ago before heading to the Adriatic league for last season, where he won their equivalent of Rookie of the Year. He’s got the physical tools — size, reported 7’3” wingspan, athletic — and he hit 40 percent from three last season. He’s got a well-rounded offensive game and defensive potential. That said his decision making is often suspect, and that leads to consistency issues on both ends. His confidence seems to get shaken at times, and the NBA will test that.

37. Boston Celtics: Semi Ojeleye, 6’7” forward (SMU). Great pick this late in the draft, potential steal of the night. He spent one season at Duke as an undersized energy/athlete off the bench, then transfered to SMU where he fit better as a stretch-four, but can he play that at the next level? He’s a very good shooter, hitting 42.5% from three (he can shoot off the catch or off the bounce), plus he’s an impressive athlete (40.5 inch vertical) with a strong work ethic. The questions start with how does he adapt his game to the NBA? He’s not going to be able to be a four, but maybe he thrive as a three.

38. Chicago Bulls: Jordon Bell, 6’9” power forward (Oregon). UPDATE: Bell has been sold to the Golden State Warriors. Could be great pick this late. The NCAA Tournament can be overrated as a scouting tool, but NBA scouts noticed his defensive performance against Kansas — he was dominant. He did the same thing at the 5-on-5 portion of the NBA Draft Combine. He is very athletic, which should help his transition to the next level. While he has an NBA body, he is offensively very raw and unpolished (there is potential there as a guy who can score around the basket, but a lot of work needs to be done).

39. LA Clippers (via trade with the Philadephia 76ers). Jawun Evans, 6’1” point guard (Oklahoma State). He basically was the Oklahoma City offense last season. His strength was as a pick-and-roll point guard who passed out of that well and found the open man, he was able to score out of it as well in college but can he finish against NBA length? He shot 37 percent from three, but there are questions about how good a shooter he ultimately is. Works hard on the defensive end, but he’s not big or especially athletic so how does he do against NBA level guards?

40. Charlotte Hornets (via trade with New Orleans Pelicans): Dwyane Bacon, 6’6″ small forwawrd (Florida State). He has a 6’10” wingspan and passes the NBA wing eye test. He scored impressively in transition last season but has a more rounded offensive game than that and can get a team buckets. He just knows how to score when he attacks. His jumper is inconsistent (33 percent from three last season) and he’s not a focused defender. Is he enough of an athlete for the NBA level.

41. Atlanta Hawks: Tyler Dorsey, 6’4” shooting guard (Oregon). He probably helped his way into the second round with a fantastic performance in the NCAA Tournament. He’s a very good shooter, hitting 42.4 percent from three. He reinforced his ability to score from deep at the NBA Draft Combine where he shot 56 percent from three. The problem is he’s small for a two guard at the next level, and he doesn’t have the athleticism to cover for it. Maybe he can still get off his shot, but can he defend?

42. Los Angeles Lakers (via trade with Utah Jazz): Thomas Bryant, 6’10” center (Indiana). He’s a project, but he has the physical tools teams look for in a big man — he measured to have a 7’6 wingspan and a 9’4.5 standing reach at the combine. He runs the floor well, plays with a high motor (which makes him good on the offensive glass), and the potential to be a force around the rim popped up in flashes. But his efficiency dipped his sophomore season, he turns the ball over too much, and there are questions about how his game translates to the next level. Can he score consistently and defend well against NBA size and length?

43. Houston Rockets:
Isaiah Hartenstein, 7’0” power forward/center (played in Lithuania last season). What to like here starts with the physical profile — he has the build of an NBA center. He’s played professionally in Europe against men, he knows hot to be physical. He’s got a decent shot, although not from more than the midrange. He’s not got a go-to offensive play, and his defense is spotty. There’s potential as he develops, but it will take a little time.

44. New York Knicks: Damyean Dotson, 6’5″ shooting guard (Houston). He earned his way into the second round with a strong performance at the Portsmouth Invitational Tournament, then the NBA Draft Combine. He started his college career at Oregon but was released from there due to sexual assault allegations. He can score slashing to the basket and shot 44 percent from three last season — he can be a guy that gets a team buckets. He’s not a guy who can create shots well, and his defense is going to have to improve to stick at the NBA level.

45. Houston Rockets:
Dillon Brooks, 6’7” forward (Oregon). The Pac 12 Player of the year, he may be a little undersized (6’6” wingspan), and not the most athletic guy on the board, but he’s a fiery competitor and that showed against North Carolina in the NCAA Tournament. Brooks is a player who is good at everything but not really great at any one thing, which makes teams cautious. To be effective at the NBA level he’s got to improve his outside shooting and be more consistent.

46. Milwaukee Bucks (via trade from Philadelphia): Sterling Brown, 6’6” shooting guard (SMU). He’s the brother of former NBA player Shannon Brown. An under-the-radar guy (no NBA Draft Combine invite), he shot 44 percent from three last season, and with a 6’10 wingspan and solid build he has an NBA body. He’s got a versatile game, the questions are how his offense translates to the next level. He struggled to finish against length, and wasn’t consistent creating his own shot.

47. Indiana Pacers:. Ike Anigbogu, 6’10 center (UCLA). Great pick up this late in the draft, could be a steal. He’s not the tallest center, but the 7’6” wingspan and his physical strength make up for that. He’s also a quick, explosive leaper, which makes him a strong defender as both a shot-blocker and an active rebounder. On the other end, Anigbogu needs polish and a perimeter game, but he’s got good hands and knows how to finish lobs/dunks (especially in transition, he runs well), plus he can be a beast on the offensive glass. He fills a role in the modern NBA.

49. LA Clippers (via trade with the Milwaukee Bucks). Sindarius Thornwell, 6’5” shooting guard (South Carolina). He boosted his stock and helped get drafted based on his play in the NCAA Tournament, where he was key for the Game Cocks to get as far as he did. He’s strong, plays a physical game, has three-point shooting range, has a good basketball IQ, and plays hard. That might make him a fan favorite at Summer League, his average athleticism and lack of explosiveness had teams concerned about what he can do at the next level.

49. Denver Nuggets: Vlatko Cancar, 6’8″ power forward (Slovenia). He’s a stretch four and role player at the NBA level. He’s got good size and a 6’11” wingspan, but what really matters is he can shoot the rock — 43 percent from three last season. He’s going to have to get stronger, then prove he can defend at the NBA level to stick. He played at a high level in Europe and could stay there to develop more.

50. Philadelphia 76ers: Mathias Lessort, 6’9” power forward/center (France). He had a strong season in the French League and the FIBA Champions’ league. He plays with high energy, and that helps make up for the fact he’s undersized by NBA standards (so does the 7’1” wingspan). He is an explosive athlete and uses that on defense and the glass well. He has the body of an NBA four but plays like a center and has to be close to the basket, he has very little shooting range.

51. Denver Nuggets: Monte’ Morris, 6’3″ point guard (Iowa State). He’s a high IQ player who knows hot to run a team and doesn’t make mistakes — he led the NBA in assist-to-turnover ratio three years in a row. He’s an okay shooter, but needs to improve. He’s an average athlete and that leads to defensive question marks. Also, will he be able to finish in the paint againt longer NBA rim protectors? Could become a solid backup point guard.

52. Indiana Pacers (pick purchased from New Orleans):. Edmond Sumner, 6’5” point guard (Xavier). How healthy is going to get and when can he play? He missed much of his freshman season with knee tendonitis, then tore his ACL during his sophomore campaign and was out the final couple months of the season. When healthy he has the physical tools to hang with any point guard in this draft, and his great first step make him fantastic as a slasher into the paint. However, he has to improve his shooting and his decision making, two things that didn’t get the chance to improve with playing time. A good gamble at this point in the draft.

53. Boston Celtics: Kadeem Allen, 6’2″ point guard (Arizona). If he sticks in the NBA, it’s because he will be fantastic on the defensive end (and that’s probably why Brad Stevens wanted him). He has a 6’9″ wingspan, and is a physical and irritating defender. He shot 42.7 percent from three last season. He’d be a 3&D point guard (think of the Patrick Beverley role), but that’s a hard one to carve out in the NBA. Especially on a Boston team deep at the guard spot.

54. Phoenix Suns: Alec Peters, 6’9” power forward (Valparaiso). He is coming off a stress fracture that ended his season early, the Suns are betting it was something that will not be chronic. He shot 36.9 percent from three, the hope is that he could be kind of a stretch four and a pick-and-pop threat. He plays a smart game. He’s not particularly long or athletic, can he defend at the NBA level? Is his ceiling Doug McDermott?

55. Utah Jazz: Nigel Williams-Goss, 6’4” point guard (Gonzaga). He is a high-IQ player who orchestrated the Gonzaga attack all the way to the NCAA title game, and he’s a natural leader who has a crafty game. He’s got the intangibles teams look for in a point guard. The challenge is he’s not terribly athletic for the position. He also needs to improve his shooting at the next level. That said, you can see why coaches will like him and may want to find a roster spot for him.

56. Boston Celtics: Jabari Bird, 6’6″ shooting guard (California). Very highly recruited out of high school, he never quite panned out as expected in Berkley. He’s not afraid to make a play or shoot the ball, and he hit 37 percent from three. He’s good on the catch-and-shoot. However, he’s an average athlete by NBA stanards, so their are defensive concerns, plus he needs to improve his decsion making considerably to stick at the next level.

57. Brooklyn Nets: Aleksandar Vezenkov, 6’9″ forward (Cyprus). This is a draft and stash pick, we’ll see if he ever comes across the ocean to play here. He played for FC Barcelona last season, before that he played in the Greek League. He’s got that experience, and he has great offensive instincts and the ability to just get buckets. He shot 35 percent from three last season. He’s scored well in Europe. The reason he’s this far down the board is a lack of athleticism that makes scouts wonder if he can hang with the NBA game.

58. New York Knicks: Ogjen Jaramaz, 6’3″ point guard (Serbia). Another draft and stash guy, he was a former teammate of Nikola Jokic and Ivica Zubac in Europe. He impressed at Adidas Eurocamp and that got him here. He’s a good, explosive athlete who thrives pushing the ball in transition. In the half court he can use his athleticism to get to the rim. If he gets stronger and improves to develop a steady jumper he could get a shot in the NBA in a few years.

59. San Antonio Spurs:. Jarron Blossomgame, 6’7″ forward (Clemson). He has NBA size, including a 6-10 winspan, plus he’s a high-level athlete. He can defend at an NBA level. The knocks are that he will turn 24 by the start of the next NBA season, so there’s limited development we can expect. Also, he shot 44% from three as a junior but just 25% as a senior. He’s not hot a great offensive game and there are questions about how he scores at the next level.

60. Atlanta Hawks: Alpha Kaba, 6’10” center (France). A draft and stash, he has all the physical tools of an NBA center, starting with that 7’5″ wingpan, and a strong build. He finishes well around the rim, but he’s not an explosive athlete. He can hit the three, but his slow release may not transfer as well to the NBA. He’s also got work to do on the defensive end. He’s a project, but with these physical tools not a bad roll of the dice at 60.

## Report: Jazz trade up for Donovan Mitchell, send Trey Lyles to Nuggets

AP Photo/Frank Franklin II
1 Comment

Excluding the big injury question marks of O.G. Anunoby and Harry Giles, Donovan Mitchell was the top prospect available at No. 13 on my board.

The Jazz traded up with the Nuggets to ensure Mitchell didn’t slip further.

Do the Jazz see Mitchell as a point guard or shooting guard? At point guard: George Hill will be a free agent this summer, but Dante Exum and Raul Neto are under contract. At shooting guard: Utah has Rodney Hood and Alec Burks. If Utah just liked Mitchell’s value and wants to give him a chance to develop and see where it goes, I could get behind that. Perhaps, this is a precursor to another move.

Trey Lyles is a 21-year-old stretch four who still has upside. He joins a group of Denver bigs – Nikola Jokic, Mason Plumlee, Kenneth Faried, Juan Hernangomez – that offer no clear well-meshing tandems.

## Blazers draft Zach Collins with No. 10 pick after swapping Nos. 15 and 25 with Kings

The Portland Trail Blazers had too many picks in the first round of the 2017 NBA Draft, and they just got rid of a couple of them.

Portland GM Neil Olshey has reportedly swapped the Nos. 15 and 20 picks in Thursday’s draft for the Sacramento Kings’ No. 10 pick. Sacramento selected Zach Collins with that pick on behalf of the Blazers.

Collins, 19, was a crucial part of Gonzaga’s run to the national title game this year. The 7-footer shot 47.6 percent on 3-pointers for the Bulldogs. He also averaged 19.2 rebounds per 100 possessions while posting an impressive net rating.

What this means for fans in Portland isn’t yet clear, although more changes to this roster should be expected. The Blazers, top heavy with the salaries of Evan Turner and Allen Crabbe, needed to add some kind of depth to their roster. It could also signal a move away from some of their current players under contract.

Portland has struggled to find useful minutes outside of Jusuf Nurkic on their front line. Al-Farouq Aminu has been a complete necessity on defense, but his turnovers on drives and dip in 3-point shooting from a season ago hurt Portland’s offense rotationally. Maurice Harkless didn’t make a big jump after an impressive playoffs in 2015-16. Noah Vonleh is still extremely rough around the edges, and Meyers Leonard suffered all season long after having shoulder surgery.

For the Kings, this represents more value for them in the draft. They reportedly didn’t love anyone at No. 10, and after trading DeMarcus Cousins last year to the New Orleans Pelicans, they will be looking to rebuild their roster with young talent.

The story here is really where the Blazers will want to go next. It feels as though Crabbe has been the player most primed for a move, but now we have to think about their front line players as well. Aminu’s contract is still stellar at \$7.3 million next season, and Vonleh has been Olshey’s pet project for two years.

That leaves Leonard as the odd man out after gaining significant traction with a non-qualifying 40-50-90 season in 2014-15. What value he has is difficult to gauge — he is a legitimate 7-footer who can shoot the lights out, and his summer workout regiment this offseason has been admirable. But he has struggled with confidence and has taken a step back defensively after Portland fired big man coach Kim Hughes in 2015.

Whether that’s the move, or if Olshey can find a suitor for Turner — who they externally have put faith in for another season — we will have to see.

There’s a logjam in Portland now, both with young big men and in salary. Something tells me Olshey isn’t done dealing yet, either by choice or by necessity.