By Blake Murphy and Sam Vecenie 2h ago
What and who is a “Toronto Raptors prospect”? The team’s success in finding and developing young, undervalued contributors has become
a defining characteristic. But are there patterns? Skill or personality types? In other words, whom should we be focusing on when the NBA Draft is held?
For the first time since 2014, the Raptors enter the draft holding a first- and second-round pick, allowing us a rare window for standard draft analysis. If the league determines the draft order based on the standings at the time of the hiatus, those picks will be at Nos. 28 and 58. If the league finishes out the regular season, the Raptors figure to remain in the Nos. 25-29 and Nos. 55-59 range. It’s safe to call them a late first and a late second.
We brought in The Athletic’s NBA draft analyst, Sam Vecenie, to weigh Toronto’s options, look at a few Raptors-type prospects and figure out whether
the front office’s draft success is repeatable.
Murphy: Sam, with the idea of making you uncomfortable out of the gate, let me just say that bugging you about the draft is one of the longest and healthiest relationships in my life. Going back to 2015, we’ve been trading podcast appearances in a largely one-sided manner, and even before we were coworkers here, your rankings were the first I’d go to in hopes of confirming my own pre-draft opinions.
I feel no guilt in bugging you once again since, for the first time since 2017, the Raptors are actually worth talking about ahead of the draft. A first-round pick! Multiple picks! As someone who loves the draft and misses covering it more intently, this is a lot of fun. Plus, I have a bit of extra time to dig deeper on guys since … you know (*gestures broadly*).
Before we get into specific names, I want to reflect on the Raptors’ success the past few years. Pascal Siakam, OG Anunoby and Norman Powell were all great finds for their draft slots, Jakob Poeltl and Delon Wright were very solid picks at theirs, and Fred VanVleet and Terence Davis II are two of the best undrafted free-agent signings in recent years. Have you been able to find a throughline in those successes? Is there something the Raptors have identified that the rest of the market hasn’t caught on to or been able to identify as capably? After five years of pretty solid results, do we know what “a Raptors prospect” looks like?
Vecenie: Between this and our undying love of pop-punk music, our relationship has been on firm ground for years, and I’m glad we’re actually getting a chance to talk about first-rounders instead of late-round flyers!
As you mentioned, the Raptors have been immensely successful at getting contributions from young players. It speaks not only to their talent identification — which is excellent and always has been — but also to their strong organizational culture and development-driven mindset. Masai Ujiri and Bobby Webster are two of the smartest people working in basketball, period, and they know what they’re looking for in how to make a prospect fit within their scheme. To me, the Raptors and the Heat are the best examples of why drafting for organizational fit as opposed to taking a “best player available” approach is so essential.
You ask about what “a Raptors prospect” looks like. I think, first and foremost, they find guys who are great teammates and have unselfish mindsets but are also incredibly driven with insatiable work ethics. All of the players you mentioned above, that’s the absolute No. 1 thing that stands out. Some of those guys are a bit more talkative when it comes to personality; some of them are extraordinarily quiet. But they all have a deep internal drive and want to keep getting better.
From a physical standpoint, the Raptors tend to look for guys with plus positional athleticism and plus positional length mixed with a well-developed frame that carries weight and strength well. One of my theories of draft evaluation over the past few years has been that teams drastically undervalue guys with true physical strength for their position. The Raptors seem to agree with such an evaluation given whom they have prioritized not only in the undrafted free agency market but also within the draft.
I will also note that the Raptors tend to value older prospects more than most. Siakam was 22 when they drafted him. Powell was 22. Wright was 23. Poeltl turned 21 before his first NBA season. Davis and VanVleet were four-year college players. Really, only Anunoby was on the younger side, and he perfectly fit everything else the organization looks for due to his elite-level physical tools, his frame and his mentality.
Honestly, few organizations do better than Toronto in the draft. The Raptors are very smart. I’ve tried to take some of what they look for and incorporate it into my own analysis, and they’re one of the few organizations I would say that about.
Murphy: That sounds like a pretty great rundown of what the Raptors are about in the draft. The one thing I would add, which isn’t something they look for necessarily but are willing to accept: A track record of strong shooting is not a prerequisite. Powell, Anunoby and Wright all had questions about their range, Siakam was a complete non-shooter and even Davis wasn’t believed to be a sure thing to translate that skill (which is bizarre given how well he “vaults up,” as Nick Nurse is fond of saying).
The Raptors seem to believe — and evidence suggests they’re correct — they can turn anyone not named Rondae Hollis-Jefferson into at least a passable shooter. Given the premium on shooting around the league, it stands to reason that devaluing shooting to a small degree allows you to value other, less teachable traits more highly. There might be sample-size and repeatability concerns with such an approach, but it’s worked so far.
So if we’re making a checklist, we’ve got work ethic, length, positional strength and athleticism — basically all the components of “defensive versatility” — with age and shooting less of a concern than it is for most teams.
Looking at the options who could be available late in the first round, Paul Reed stands out as someone who fits the description. I’ve been asked about him a bunch, with Raptors readers seeming to gravitate toward his defensive potential. Reed had elite block-plus-steal rates and very strong on/off splits with DePaul, and the shooting could come along. Reed, though, is someone you’re lower on than some others (
most notably John Hollinger).
What is it about Reed that’s stopping you from liking him late in the first round? And is there any chance that without the benefit of the workout circuit, he will slide even further than No. 40 in your latest mock draft?
Vecenie: Reed makes a lot of sense for a lot of what the Raptors look for. Ultimately, I would imagine he’ll be on the board for them given what they look for. He checks a lot of boxes, and even though I have him around No. 40 on my board, I wouldn’t mind this pick for them necessarily.
A lot of teams I’ve spoken to are undergoing a pretty similar internal process on Reed as Hollinger and I are.
The analytics folks in front offices are big fans. His steal rate and block rates are absurd. To put it into layman’s terms, Reed is the first high-major player to average at least 1.9 steals and 2.5 blocks per game since Nerlens Noel did so for Kentucky in 2013. His on-court performance for DePaul was absurd. According to
Pivot Analysis, DePaul, who went 16-16 last season, was six points better than its opponents per 100 possessions when Reed was on the floor, versus a staggering 21 points worse than its opponents when he was off of it. He made everything happen on both ends for them. His numbers took a slight dive in Big East play, but overall, he was still good.
And yet the tape just isn’t as wildly impressive from a skill-set perspective as the numbers make it seem. The positives are that Reed has a very clear athletic translation. He has a great first step and is very reactive. His length is awesome. Around the basket and out, he has a very real touch. He’s kind of the ultimate havoc player. His sheer presence made things happen on the court, and most of the time it was pretty positive.
But the actual tools aren’t there yet. He’s much more of a project than you’d think. Reed’s jumper is kind of a mess mechanically and will need to be reworked. He has a significant hitch at the top, and his balance isn’t great. And while the Raptors have certainly been willing to work with players on improving jumpers in the past, typically the players they take have a really strong base to work with. Even Siakam had shown a midrange jumper that didn’t have many flaws mechanically. Reed does have the athletic dexterity to improve, and he even took some shots on the move this year in a way he’d need to in the NBA. He just wasn’t very effective at it, unfortunately.
The rest of his offensive game is similarly wild. He can attack in a straight line and has a really good first step, but he’s not an ambidextrous driver, capable of handling the ball only with his right hand. He finishes well around the rim with both hands, but I wouldn’t say he’s a consistent above-the-rim finisher unless he has a head of steam. I don’t feel comfortable with him making awesome decisions consistently. Again, it’s a lot of havoc.
And that bears out even more on defense, where he’s undeniably a positive. Reed is tenacious, moves his feet well and blocks shots from the weak side with impunity. He’s also overaggressive and can get out of position. I don’t think he’s a good enough defensive rebounder to play the five or that he has enough bulk not to get pushed around.
Basically, I worry he might not be skilled enough or a good enough decision-maker right now to play the four on offense in today’s NBA, and he also isn’t big enough to play the five. I’ve also heard from a few NBA teams that have interviewed him that the role he sees himself in long term isn’t quite commensurate with where they see him. He’s just a very weird fit in a lot of ways, despite the immense production. I hope he ends up in a place like Toronto, which I trust would get the most out of him due to its internal development intelligence. He has some real upside. But he could go a lot of ways as a prospect, and I worry a bit that the team that has him first might not be the one that reaps the rewards.
Murphy: That’s a conflicting profile, for sure. And as I wrote last week, the lack of a pre-draft process could be especially difficult for a team like the Raptors that
puts a premium on tougher-to-gauge intangibles — the Deyonta Davis corollary — like drive, cultural fit and potential role fit. (For example, how would such a player respond to a G League assignment? To the spotty second-unit minutes that might come on an established win-now team?)
You mentioned Reed’s lack of natural position, which is something the Raptors have managed well this year. Hollis-Jefferson, for example, has been deployed as one of the league’s most positionally versatile defenders but has basically played as a 6-foot-5 centre on offence, being used as a roll man or play finisher in the dunker and on the offensive glass. Chris Boucher had almost the opposite effect, playing more of a de facto four role despite being much bigger. The Raptors are creative when it comes to turning a “tweener” into a positive.
Which brings us to the player your latest mock has coming to Toronto: Isaiah Stewart.
Stewart seems like “a Raptors guy” in a different way than Reed. His skill profile maybe doesn’t line up quite as well as Reed’s, but he’s the closest thing to a distressed asset in the first-round discussion. He’s a former prep player of the year, McDonald’s All-American and consensus five-star recruit. Had he turned in a poor season at Washington, I’d understand teams souring, but he was also first-team All-Pac 12 as a freshman.
Betting on lottery skill and pedigree late in the first round seems like a Raptors thing to do, and while we discussed how they don’t care about overaged players, Stewart turns 19 this week and offers some additional developmental runway. That’s an especially bright “Raptors green light” to me when I read about how much coaches love Stewart’s motor and work ethic. It’s not as sexy or obvious of a draft-slide pick as Anunoby was, but the logic is similar.
So, why could Stewart slide that far? It seems to come down to a lack of clarity on his NBA position. Offensively, he might profile best in the role the Raptors tasked Hollis-Jefferson with this year. Defensively, he might not have the kind of versatility the Raptors look for. That said, they have Marc Gasol and Serge Ibaka hitting free agency this summer, so even if you like Stewart only as a solid backup five, that’s an area of need.
Can enough of his skills translate to make the fit work in execution? Or is Stewart too limited beyond the strength, physicality and motor that allowed him to thrive to this point?
Vecenie: Stewart has a lot of the things the Raptors value. His mentality is a perfect fit for them. He’s a “do it all for the team” type of kid who has an elite motor and whose character is superb. Teams that have interviewed him so far have come away extremely impressed. He’s also a worker.
Regarding his game, yeah, I think I’m much higher than some seem to be. I have him as a top-20 guy in this class. He is a young freshman and doesn’t turn 19 until this week, and he was enormously productive this year. He averaged 17 points, 8.8 rebounds and 2.1 blocks per game while posting a 62.9 true-shooting percentage. He’s the first freshman to post those numbers over a full season in nearly the last three decades of college basketball, according to
Sports-Reference.com.
The big questions about him are simply about fit because he played in Washington’s scheme this past year. In that vein, I think there is a lot of context missing when people discuss his game. Washington asked him to post up on basically every possession last year because it had very little in the way of competent guard play. His posting up or grabbing offensive rebounds was its best option for offense. And around the basket, he carved out space well, used his shredded 250 pounds expertly and then displayed the touch necessary to be an effective scorer inside. Now, he didn’t show much as a passer last year when double-teams came, and I think that’s a reasonable question. How will he deal when he’s crowded? Can he make rapid decisions on the move? I don’t think we have answers yet, which isn’t great.
One thing I do feel confident in, though? Stewart is going to shoot. I know he hit 25 percent on only 20 3-point attempts last season, but scouts who have been out to Washington’s practices and seen him at lower levels feel very good about his shooting mechanics long term. An indication there is that he hit 77.4 percent from the foul line last year. I’m not an enormous fan of using free-throw percentage to extrapolate to the 3-point line when we have 3-point results, but it’s reasonable to do so when we don’t have anything resembling a reasonable sample. I would bet Stewart works his way into being a pick-and-pop big man.
The real questions come on defense. We didn’t get much of a chance to see how Stewart moves laterally in space last season because Washington played a 2-3 zone that stuck him in the middle most of the time. He showed a bit of a mixed bag when it came to shutting down the paint. Some games, he was super active. Other games, he was less so. He did get better as the season went on, though. He has the tools at 6-foot-9 with a 7-foot-4 wingspan to be a legitimate rim protector at centre. Ultimately, that’s the position he’s going to have to play, and it’s going to have to be more of a drop coverage scheme in which he gets much more comfortable calling out coverages from the back line. But as long as he’s there at the rim, I think he’s going to be effective long term defending the basket. I tend to bet on people, and at the very least, it’s hard for me to see Stewart failing at the next level. He has too many positives as an offensive player, as a worker and as a kid.
Murphy: Let’s flip to the other end of the position spectrum. While Gasol’s and Ibaka’s contracts leave near-term questions inside, there are longer-term ones on the perimeter, specifically at point guard. VanVleet will be
one of the top free agents on the market this summer, and Kyle Lowry has only one year left on his deal. Lowry has defied aging convention to date, but that probably won’t last forever. (
It might last forever.) There are no point prospects in the pipeline unless you think Davis can eventually be a scoring one instead of what’s probably his best role: an attacking two and secondary creator.
If Toronto wants an insurance policy or even just a third point guard to throw into the developmental mix — it has succeeded for a long time with dual-point-guard lineups — this is a good year to have a late first-round pick, from the looks of it.
I’m going to leave this one open-ended and just ask which guard options you like for Toronto at No. 28. I will also shoehorn in that I’m a big Grant Riller fan, and while his defensive acumen isn’t quite what the Raptors normally look for, the pressure he can put on the rim at the other end is something that would fit well in their second unit. (Miss me with the VanVleet comps, though, other than the beards.)
Vecenie: If the Raptors are interested in shoring up the lead guard spot, this is the draft and the pick slot to do it. I have something like 16 lead or combo guards who I think have a chance in the first round, and many of those will be available at this pick.
Riller is definitely an option. He’s an elite kid and an elite worker. Particularly, he’s one of the best finishers at the rim for a guard I’ve ever evaluated. As a senior, Riller hit 63.4 percent of his shots at the rim in half-court settings, according to Synergy, one of the best marks for any guard in college this season. Last year as a junior, though, he made 73.4 percent of those shots, which is basically a number commensurate only with big men who dunk half of their shots at the basket. It’s the best mark in the history of the database for a draft prospect guard. I’d also note that he’s extraordinarily creative as a ballhandler, and he plays with great tempo and change of direction and, as long as the shot translates, should immediately be a good offensive player in the NBA. I’m a big fan, but you mentioned the weakness that makes me wonder whether he’s a true fit. He’s a pretty poor defender, and he doesn’t have elite-level positional size or length.
Tre Jones will probably be off the board by the time the Raptors pick, but he brings a lot of the same attributes that Lowry brought to the table as a rookie in 2006 if he’s not. He’s tough as nails, an elite defender and has absolutely terrific, unselfish tendencies as a passer. Where Lowry improved was as a shooter, and Jones will need to make the same leap. But as a starter kit, I like the idea of Jones a lot due to his mature game that sees him consistently make strong decisions. If he shoots, he’s a starting point guard.
Three fourth-year college guards are pretty interesting, too. Oregon’s Payton Pritchard doesn’t fit much of what the Raptors look for but is a terrific offensive player who can create for himself, knock down shots and pass it to teammates unselfishly. Cassius Winston out of Michigan State has the kind of length and shot-making that the Raptors might value, but he lacks the defensive mindset this team tends to appreciate. Finally, San Diego State’s Malachi Flynn is probably the closest thing to a VanVleet-style lead guard as exists in this class. He’s a tough defender, a terrific shot-maker and an unselfish passer who is undersized and has similar questions about his NBA fit. But he’s a similar level of confident “hooper” that VanVleet was. If I had to pick one of that trio whom I could see the Raptors liking, it would be him.
I’d also note four underclassmen: Baylor’s Jared Butler, Arizona’s Nico Mannion, Stanford’s Tyrell Terry and Kansas’ Devon Dotson. Dotson possesses the most “Raptors-type” tools out of that foursome, but I would be surprised if these guys end up being the targets.
Murphy: Mannion! I’m a fan. Not necessarily for the Raptors over the other options you presented, but I think he’ll be a fun player. Dotson is interesting for the speed factor, too; the Raptors brought Isaiah Taylor into training camp last year to compete for the third-point guard slot, in large part because his speed represented a dynamic change of pace next to VanVleet and Lowry on a team that loves the transition game. I could see them looking for a similar package in a guard — if not at No. 29 then at No. 59.
With respect to No. 28 versus No. 58, with the draft as wide open as it is, are there scenarios in which the Raptors maybe luck into a pair of players they’d consider at No. 28? What I mean is, it feels like this will be a draft in which teams have things ranked quite differently — not dissimilar to 2016 outside of the top eight — and could some guys, as a result, have a 30-pick-wide draft range?
And before I let you go, do you have any thoughts on targets with the No. 58 pick? I realize that trying to project who will still be around is a fool’s errand, but there could be a couple of names worth grabbing for a two-way contract to see how they develop.
It looks like there could be some wings worth getting a longer look at (Robert Woodard, Abdoulaye N’Doye, Jayden Scrubb, Paul Eboua, Trevelin Queen, etc.) or bigs to compete for centre depth if they don’t go that route in the first round. Does anyone stand out to you for Toronto there?
Vecenie: I don’t think it’s impossible for someone to be available at No. 58 who could have been in the mix at No. 28, if only because some players aren’t as enthusiastic about two-way contracts and thus try to do what they can to stop teams from taking them in the second round.
I’m glad you brought up the two international players in Eboua and N’Doye. They evoke the Raptors to a T. Eboua is 6-foot-7 wing forward with a 7-foot-3 or so wingspan and looks absolutely enormous. He improved a decent amount offensively this year but is still a ways away on that end. Defensively, though, there are a lot of tools there. N’Doye is the more polished of the two, similarly at 6-foot-7 with a 7-foot-2 wingspan. His offensive game is farther along, although he’s not nearly the athlete that Eboua is. If N’Doye shoots it, he has a real shot at playing in the NBA even though he’d be a below-average athlete. But the shooting is still up in the air despite good results on very open 3s. Both players would make sense as stashes.
Woodard will likely be gone at No. 58, but it’s easy to see why the Raptors would be interested and might consider him at No. 28. He is 6-foot-7 with a 7-foot-1 wingspan and has solid quickness on the perimeter defensively. He also hit a high percentage of his 3s this year, although it was on a small sample and I’m somewhat concerned long term about that upside. My bigger issues surround his feel for the game and his ability to handle the ball. He’s not quite there yet as a first-round pick, but if the Raptors are willing to put in the work, they could easily get him there.
I’ll name one more sleeper other than Scrubb and Queen, both of whom I like. Queen is an advanced analytics darling who would make sense as a shot-making wing at No. 58, and Scrubb is a playmaking guard at 6-foot-6 who can bring a lot of things to the table, although there is some concern about how talented he is given his quality of competition in junior college last year wasn’t great. Another one is Lamine Diane out of Cal State Northridge. There are a lot of similarities between him and Siakam as older sophomore small-school players entering the draft who were enormously productive. Diane averaged 25.6 points, 10.2 rebounds, 2.8 assists, 1.7 steals and two blocks per game. He doesn’t really shoot it well and isn’t an absurd athlete. But he can create in the midrange.
Murphy: And with that, Sam, I’ll say goodbye until we reconvene to decide which pop-punk song best describes the two players the Raptors eventually draft.
Hopefully, this has served as an effective primer before we start breaking down prospects in small groups in the coming weeks. As usual, feel free to suggest/request specific prospects in the comments, and let us know what you think of the fit for the players Sam and I discussed.
(Photo of Grant Riller: Mitchell Layton / Getty Images)
By Blake Murphy and Sam Vecenie 2h ago
What and who is a “Toronto Raptors prospect”? The team’s success in finding and developing young, undervalued contributors has become
a defining characteristic. But are there patterns? Skill or personality types? In other words, whom should we be focusing on when the NBA Draft is held?
For the first time since 2014, the Raptors enter the draft holding a first- and second-round pick, allowing us a rare window for standard draft analysis. If the league determines the draft order based on the standings at the time of the hiatus, those picks will be at Nos. 28 and 58. If the league finishes out the regular season, the Raptors figure to remain in the Nos. 25-29 and Nos. 55-59 range. It’s safe to call them a late first and a late second.
We brought in The Athletic’s NBA draft analyst, Sam Vecenie, to weigh Toronto’s options, look at a few Raptors-type prospects and figure out whether
the front office’s draft success is repeatable.
Murphy: Sam, with the idea of making you uncomfortable out of the gate, let me just say that bugging you about the draft is one of the longest and healthiest relationships in my life. Going back to 2015, we’ve been trading podcast appearances in a largely one-sided manner, and even before we were coworkers here, your rankings were the first I’d go to in hopes of confirming my own pre-draft opinions.
I feel no guilt in bugging you once again since, for the first time since 2017, the Raptors are actually worth talking about ahead of the draft. A first-round pick! Multiple picks! As someone who loves the draft and misses covering it more intently, this is a lot of fun. Plus, I have a bit of extra time to dig deeper on guys since … you know (*gestures broadly*).
Before we get into specific names, I want to reflect on the Raptors’ success the past few years. Pascal Siakam, OG Anunoby and Norman Powell were all great finds for their draft slots, Jakob Poeltl and Delon Wright were very solid picks at theirs, and Fred VanVleet and Terence Davis II are two of the best undrafted free-agent signings in recent years. Have you been able to find a throughline in those successes? Is there something the Raptors have identified that the rest of the market hasn’t caught on to or been able to identify as capably? After five years of pretty solid results, do we know what “a Raptors prospect” looks like?
Vecenie: Between this and our undying love of pop-punk music, our relationship has been on firm ground for years, and I’m glad we’re actually getting a chance to talk about first-rounders instead of late-round flyers!
As you mentioned, the Raptors have been immensely successful at getting contributions from young players. It speaks not only to their talent identification — which is excellent and always has been — but also to their strong organizational culture and development-driven mindset. Masai Ujiri and Bobby Webster are two of the smartest people working in basketball, period, and they know what they’re looking for in how to make a prospect fit within their scheme. To me, the Raptors and the Heat are the best examples of why drafting for organizational fit as opposed to taking a “best player available” approach is so essential.
You ask about what “a Raptors prospect” looks like. I think, first and foremost, they find guys who are great teammates and have unselfish mindsets but are also incredibly driven with insatiable work ethics. All of the players you mentioned above, that’s the absolute No. 1 thing that stands out. Some of those guys are a bit more talkative when it comes to personality; some of them are extraordinarily quiet. But they all have a deep internal drive and want to keep getting better.
From a physical standpoint, the Raptors tend to look for guys with plus positional athleticism and plus positional length mixed with a well-developed frame that carries weight and strength well. One of my theories of draft evaluation over the past few years has been that teams drastically undervalue guys with true physical strength for their position. The Raptors seem to agree with such an evaluation given whom they have prioritized not only in the undrafted free agency market but also within the draft.
I will also note that the Raptors tend to value older prospects more than most. Siakam was 22 when they drafted him. Powell was 22. Wright was 23. Poeltl turned 21 before his first NBA season. Davis and VanVleet were four-year college players. Really, only Anunoby was on the younger side, and he perfectly fit everything else the organization looks for due to his elite-level physical tools, his frame and his mentality.
Honestly, few organizations do better than Toronto in the draft. The Raptors are very smart. I’ve tried to take some of what they look for and incorporate it into my own analysis, and they’re one of the few organizations I would say that about.
Murphy: That sounds like a pretty great rundown of what the Raptors are about in the draft. The one thing I would add, which isn’t something they look for necessarily but are willing to accept: A track record of strong shooting is not a prerequisite. Powell, Anunoby and Wright all had questions about their range, Siakam was a complete non-shooter and even Davis wasn’t believed to be a sure thing to translate that skill (which is bizarre given how well he “vaults up,” as Nick Nurse is fond of saying).
The Raptors seem to believe — and evidence suggests they’re correct — they can turn anyone not named Rondae Hollis-Jefferson into at least a passable shooter. Given the premium on shooting around the league, it stands to reason that devaluing shooting to a small degree allows you to value other, less teachable traits more highly. There might be sample-size and repeatability concerns with such an approach, but it’s worked so far.
So if we’re making a checklist, we’ve got work ethic, length, positional strength and athleticism — basically all the components of “defensive versatility” — with age and shooting less of a concern than it is for most teams.
Looking at the options who could be available late in the first round, Paul Reed stands out as someone who fits the description. I’ve been asked about him a bunch, with Raptors readers seeming to gravitate toward his defensive potential. Reed had elite block-plus-steal rates and very strong on/off splits with DePaul, and the shooting could come along. Reed, though, is someone you’re lower on than some others (
most notably John Hollinger).
What is it about Reed that’s stopping you from liking him late in the first round? And is there any chance that without the benefit of the workout circuit, he will slide even further than No. 40 in your latest mock draft?
Vecenie: Reed makes a lot of sense for a lot of what the Raptors look for. Ultimately, I would imagine he’ll be on the board for them given what they look for. He checks a lot of boxes, and even though I have him around No. 40 on my board, I wouldn’t mind this pick for them necessarily.
A lot of teams I’ve spoken to are undergoing a pretty similar internal process on Reed as Hollinger and I are.
The analytics folks in front offices are big fans. His steal rate and block rates are absurd. To put it into layman’s terms, Reed is the first high-major player to average at least 1.9 steals and 2.5 blocks per game since Nerlens Noel did so for Kentucky in 2013. His on-court performance for DePaul was absurd. According to
Pivot Analysis, DePaul, who went 16-16 last season, was six points better than its opponents per 100 possessions when Reed was on the floor, versus a staggering 21 points worse than its opponents when he was off of it. He made everything happen on both ends for them. His numbers took a slight dive in Big East play, but overall, he was still good.
And yet the tape just isn’t as wildly impressive from a skill-set perspective as the numbers make it seem. The positives are that Reed has a very clear athletic translation. He has a great first step and is very reactive. His length is awesome. Around the basket and out, he has a very real touch. He’s kind of the ultimate havoc player. His sheer presence made things happen on the court, and most of the time it was pretty positive.
But the actual tools aren’t there yet. He’s much more of a project than you’d think. Reed’s jumper is kind of a mess mechanically and will need to be reworked. He has a significant hitch at the top, and his balance isn’t great. And while the Raptors have certainly been willing to work with players on improving jumpers in the past, typically the players they take have a really strong base to work with. Even Siakam had shown a midrange jumper that didn’t have many flaws mechanically. Reed does have the athletic dexterity to improve, and he even took some shots on the move this year in a way he’d need to in the NBA. He just wasn’t very effective at it, unfortunately.
The rest of his offensive game is similarly wild. He can attack in a straight line and has a really good first step, but he’s not an ambidextrous driver, capable of handling the ball only with his right hand. He finishes well around the rim with both hands, but I wouldn’t say he’s a consistent above-the-rim finisher unless he has a head of steam. I don’t feel comfortable with him making awesome decisions consistently. Again, it’s a lot of havoc.
And that bears out even more on defense, where he’s undeniably a positive. Reed is tenacious, moves his feet well and blocks shots from the weak side with impunity. He’s also overaggressive and can get out of position. I don’t think he’s a good enough defensive rebounder to play the five or that he has enough bulk not to get pushed around.
Basically, I worry he might not be skilled enough or a good enough decision-maker right now to play the four on offense in today’s NBA, and he also isn’t big enough to play the five. I’ve also heard from a few NBA teams that have interviewed him that the role he sees himself in long term isn’t quite commensurate with where they see him. He’s just a very weird fit in a lot of ways, despite the immense production. I hope he ends up in a place like Toronto, which I trust would get the most out of him due to its internal development intelligence. He has some real upside. But he could go a lot of ways as a prospect, and I worry a bit that the team that has him first might not be the one that reaps the rewards.
Murphy: That’s a conflicting profile, for sure. And as I wrote last week, the lack of a pre-draft process could be especially difficult for a team like the Raptors that
puts a premium on tougher-to-gauge intangibles — the Deyonta Davis corollary — like drive, cultural fit and potential role fit. (For example, how would such a player respond to a G League assignment? To the spotty second-unit minutes that might come on an established win-now team?)
You mentioned Reed’s lack of natural position, which is something the Raptors have managed well this year. Hollis-Jefferson, for example, has been deployed as one of the league’s most positionally versatile defenders but has basically played as a 6-foot-5 centre on offence, being used as a roll man or play finisher in the dunker and on the offensive glass. Chris Boucher had almost the opposite effect, playing more of a de facto four role despite being much bigger. The Raptors are creative when it comes to turning a “tweener” into a positive.
Which brings us to the player your latest mock has coming to Toronto: Isaiah Stewart.
Stewart seems like “a Raptors guy” in a different way than Reed. His skill profile maybe doesn’t line up quite as well as Reed’s, but he’s the closest thing to a distressed asset in the first-round discussion. He’s a former prep player of the year, McDonald’s All-American and consensus five-star recruit. Had he turned in a poor season at Washington, I’d understand teams souring, but he was also first-team All-Pac 12 as a freshman.
Betting on lottery skill and pedigree late in the first round seems like a Raptors thing to do, and while we discussed how they don’t care about overaged players, Stewart turns 19 this week and offers some additional developmental runway. That’s an especially bright “Raptors green light” to me when I read about how much coaches love Stewart’s motor and work ethic. It’s not as sexy or obvious of a draft-slide pick as Anunoby was, but the logic is similar.
So, why could Stewart slide that far? It seems to come down to a lack of clarity on his NBA position. Offensively, he might profile best in the role the Raptors tasked Hollis-Jefferson with this year. Defensively, he might not have the kind of versatility the Raptors look for. That said, they have Marc Gasol and Serge Ibaka hitting free agency this summer, so even if you like Stewart only as a solid backup five, that’s an area of need.
Can enough of his skills translate to make the fit work in execution? Or is Stewart too limited beyond the strength, physicality and motor that allowed him to thrive to this point?
Vecenie: Stewart has a lot of the things the Raptors value. His mentality is a perfect fit for them. He’s a “do it all for the team” type of kid who has an elite motor and whose character is superb. Teams that have interviewed him so far have come away extremely impressed. He’s also a worker.
Regarding his game, yeah, I think I’m much higher than some seem to be. I have him as a top-20 guy in this class. He is a young freshman and doesn’t turn 19 until this week, and he was enormously productive this year. He averaged 17 points, 8.8 rebounds and 2.1 blocks per game while posting a 62.9 true-shooting percentage. He’s the first freshman to post those numbers over a full season in nearly the last three decades of college basketball, according to
Sports-Reference.com.
The big questions about him are simply about fit because he played in Washington’s scheme this past year. In that vein, I think there is a lot of context missing when people discuss his game. Washington asked him to post up on basically every possession last year because it had very little in the way of competent guard play. His posting up or grabbing offensive rebounds was its best option for offense. And around the basket, he carved out space well, used his shredded 250 pounds expertly and then displayed the touch necessary to be an effective scorer inside. Now, he didn’t show much as a passer last year when double-teams came, and I think that’s a reasonable question. How will he deal when he’s crowded? Can he make rapid decisions on the move? I don’t think we have answers yet, which isn’t great.
One thing I do feel confident in, though? Stewart is going to shoot. I know he hit 25 percent on only 20 3-point attempts last season, but scouts who have been out to Washington’s practices and seen him at lower levels feel very good about his shooting mechanics long term. An indication there is that he hit 77.4 percent from the foul line last year. I’m not an enormous fan of using free-throw percentage to extrapolate to the 3-point line when we have 3-point results, but it’s reasonable to do so when we don’t have anything resembling a reasonable sample. I would bet Stewart works his way into being a pick-and-pop big man.
The real questions come on defense. We didn’t get much of a chance to see how Stewart moves laterally in space last season because Washington played a 2-3 zone that stuck him in the middle most of the time. He showed a bit of a mixed bag when it came to shutting down the paint. Some games, he was super active. Other games, he was less so. He did get better as the season went on, though. He has the tools at 6-foot-9 with a 7-foot-4 wingspan to be a legitimate rim protector at centre. Ultimately, that’s the position he’s going to have to play, and it’s going to have to be more of a drop coverage scheme in which he gets much more comfortable calling out coverages from the back line. But as long as he’s there at the rim, I think he’s going to be effective long term defending the basket. I tend to bet on people, and at the very least, it’s hard for me to see Stewart failing at the next level. He has too many positives as an offensive player, as a worker and as a kid.
Murphy: Let’s flip to the other end of the position spectrum. While Gasol’s and Ibaka’s contracts leave near-term questions inside, there are longer-term ones on the perimeter, specifically at point guard. VanVleet will be
one of the top free agents on the market this summer, and Kyle Lowry has only one year left on his deal. Lowry has defied aging convention to date, but that probably won’t last forever. (
It might last forever.) There are no point prospects in the pipeline unless you think Davis can eventually be a scoring one instead of what’s probably his best role: an attacking two and secondary creator.
If Toronto wants an insurance policy or even just a third point guard to throw into the developmental mix — it has succeeded for a long time with dual-point-guard lineups — this is a good year to have a late first-round pick, from the looks of it.
I’m going to leave this one open-ended and just ask which guard options you like for Toronto at No. 28. I will also shoehorn in that I’m a big Grant Riller fan, and while his defensive acumen isn’t quite what the Raptors normally look for, the pressure he can put on the rim at the other end is something that would fit well in their second unit. (Miss me with the VanVleet comps, though, other than the beards.)
Vecenie: If the Raptors are interested in shoring up the lead guard spot, this is the draft and the pick slot to do it. I have something like 16 lead or combo guards who I think have a chance in the first round, and many of those will be available at this pick.
Riller is definitely an option. He’s an elite kid and an elite worker. Particularly, he’s one of the best finishers at the rim for a guard I’ve ever evaluated. As a senior, Riller hit 63.4 percent of his shots at the rim in half-court settings, according to Synergy, one of the best marks for any guard in college this season. Last year as a junior, though, he made 73.4 percent of those shots, which is basically a number commensurate only with big men who dunk half of their shots at the basket. It’s the best mark in the history of the database for a draft prospect guard. I’d also note that he’s extraordinarily creative as a ballhandler, and he plays with great tempo and change of direction and, as long as the shot translates, should immediately be a good offensive player in the NBA. I’m a big fan, but you mentioned the weakness that makes me wonder whether he’s a true fit. He’s a pretty poor defender, and he doesn’t have elite-level positional size or length.
Tre Jones will probably be off the board by the time the Raptors pick, but he brings a lot of the same attributes that Lowry brought to the table as a rookie in 2006 if he’s not. He’s tough as nails, an elite defender and has absolutely terrific, unselfish tendencies as a passer. Where Lowry improved was as a shooter, and Jones will need to make the same leap. But as a starter kit, I like the idea of Jones a lot due to his mature game that sees him consistently make strong decisions. If he shoots, he’s a starting point guard.
Three fourth-year college guards are pretty interesting, too. Oregon’s Payton Pritchard doesn’t fit much of what the Raptors look for but is a terrific offensive player who can create for himself, knock down shots and pass it to teammates unselfishly. Cassius Winston out of Michigan State has the kind of length and shot-making that the Raptors might value, but he lacks the defensive mindset this team tends to appreciate. Finally, San Diego State’s Malachi Flynn is probably the closest thing to a VanVleet-style lead guard as exists in this class. He’s a tough defender, a terrific shot-maker and an unselfish passer who is undersized and has similar questions about his NBA fit. But he’s a similar level of confident “hooper” that VanVleet was. If I had to pick one of that trio whom I could see the Raptors liking, it would be him.
I’d also note four underclassmen: Baylor’s Jared Butler, Arizona’s Nico Mannion, Stanford’s Tyrell Terry and Kansas’ Devon Dotson. Dotson possesses the most “Raptors-type” tools out of that foursome, but I would be surprised if these guys end up being the targets.
Murphy: Mannion! I’m a fan. Not necessarily for the Raptors over the other options you presented, but I think he’ll be a fun player. Dotson is interesting for the speed factor, too; the Raptors brought Isaiah Taylor into training camp last year to compete for the third-point guard slot, in large part because his speed represented a dynamic change of pace next to VanVleet and Lowry on a team that loves the transition game. I could see them looking for a similar package in a guard — if not at No. 29 then at No. 59.
With respect to No. 28 versus No. 58, with the draft as wide open as it is, are there scenarios in which the Raptors maybe luck into a pair of players they’d consider at No. 28? What I mean is, it feels like this will be a draft in which teams have things ranked quite differently — not dissimilar to 2016 outside of the top eight — and could some guys, as a result, have a 30-pick-wide draft range?
And before I let you go, do you have any thoughts on targets with the No. 58 pick? I realize that trying to project who will still be around is a fool’s errand, but there could be a couple of names worth grabbing for a two-way contract to see how they develop.
It looks like there could be some wings worth getting a longer look at (Robert Woodard, Abdoulaye N’Doye, Jayden Scrubb, Paul Eboua, Trevelin Queen, etc.) or bigs to compete for centre depth if they don’t go that route in the first round. Does anyone stand out to you for Toronto there?
Vecenie: I don’t think it’s impossible for someone to be available at No. 58 who could have been in the mix at No. 28, if only because some players aren’t as enthusiastic about two-way contracts and thus try to do what they can to stop teams from taking them in the second round.
I’m glad you brought up the two international players in Eboua and N’Doye. They evoke the Raptors to a T. Eboua is 6-foot-7 wing forward with a 7-foot-3 or so wingspan and looks absolutely enormous. He improved a decent amount offensively this year but is still a ways away on that end. Defensively, though, there are a lot of tools there. N’Doye is the more polished of the two, similarly at 6-foot-7 with a 7-foot-2 wingspan. His offensive game is farther along, although he’s not nearly the athlete that Eboua is. If N’Doye shoots it, he has a real shot at playing in the NBA even though he’d be a below-average athlete. But the shooting is still up in the air despite good results on very open 3s. Both players would make sense as stashes.
Woodard will likely be gone at No. 58, but it’s easy to see why the Raptors would be interested and might consider him at No. 28. He is 6-foot-7 with a 7-foot-1 wingspan and has solid quickness on the perimeter defensively. He also hit a high percentage of his 3s this year, although it was on a small sample and I’m somewhat concerned long term about that upside. My bigger issues surround his feel for the game and his ability to handle the ball. He’s not quite there yet as a first-round pick, but if the Raptors are willing to put in the work, they could easily get him there.
I’ll name one more sleeper other than Scrubb and Queen, both of whom I like. Queen is an advanced analytics darling who would make sense as a shot-making wing at No. 58, and Scrubb is a playmaking guard at 6-foot-6 who can bring a lot of things to the table, although there is some concern about how talented he is given his quality of competition in junior college last year wasn’t great. Another one is Lamine Diane out of Cal State Northridge. There are a lot of similarities between him and Siakam as older sophomore small-school players entering the draft who were enormously productive. Diane averaged 25.6 points, 10.2 rebounds, 2.8 assists, 1.7 steals and two blocks per game. He doesn’t really shoot it well and isn’t an absurd athlete. But he can create in the midrange.
Murphy: And with that, Sam, I’ll say goodbye until we reconvene to decide which pop-punk song best describes the two players the Raptors eventually draft.
Hopefully, this has served as an effective primer before we start breaking down prospects in small groups in the coming weeks. As usual, feel free to suggest/request specific prospects in the comments, and let us know what you think of the fit for the players Sam and I discussed.
(Photo of Grant Riller: Mitchell Layton / Getty Images)