Intro

Darius Acuff

Kingston Flemings

Keaton Wagler

Labaron Philon

Mikel Brown

Tyler Tanner

Christian Anderson

Brayden Burries

Bennett Stirtz

Ebuka Okorie

Mikel BROWN

Back injuries are very serious and scary long term injuries for any position, but with a lack of public detailed medical reports and personal medical expertise, the injury concerns will be omitted from any breakdown for Mikel Brown. Shooting is the known offensive factor for Brown with an added specialty in PnR passing, but the ability to keep defenses honest from rim pressure and two pointer generation remain the hurdles for his full capacity in the NBA. Brown has a lead guard projection with his flashy passing and secondary playmaker upside (due to his experience playing next to Ryan Conwell), but there are significant issues with his flaws in each role.  

Before anything, it is worth noting that Mikel Brown has the smallest sample size of the guards in this group and might have been hindered in play by his sapped athleticism. Louisville did not play in transition much this year which further limited the available sample for Brown’s open court abilities, but perhaps it was a blessing in disguise for his half court playmaking skills being under the spotlight.^(Fig 1, 2) With the sample problems out of the way, when it comes to shooting, it is worth noting that he may have the best shot form in this class, but the allergy to midrange shooting in efficiency and frequency is concerning for his projection as a self creator that will continue to get good looks at threes in the league.^(Fig 8) His scoring is very reliant on screens and the catch and shoot ability is definitely secondary to his off the dribble three rhythm which limits the viability of playing into a strong lineup in his early years in the league. Even off the dribble, Brown relies on screens to generate efficient shots and just didn’t seem to have the touch on tough pull up threes that he will have to take as a self creator in the league (injuries may play a part in this). He doesn’t have the most off ball activity and even if it can be argued that the injuries hindered how hard he could cut, the lack of standout scoring from the field is an issue for projecting confidently as a high shot diet player in the NBA.^(Fig 9) If the lack of rim pressure and some of the shooting discrepancies show up in the league, the secondary option skills as a scorer are a bit more untrustworthy for a top pick. 

There is a need for him to develop a midrange or touch floater game to achieve a Tre Johnson profile with the lack of rim pressure, but even then the issues there are different to Johnson’s with Brown taking shots at the rim, but with poor quality and much worse efficiency metrics.^(Fig 10) To alleviate some of the scoring profile concerns, he is an elite foul drawer and he does so through contact and is very crafty in finding situations where he can provide undeniable hacking from the defender where the official has to call it. This contact arrives on drives and snaking PnRs to the elbow, which is on the one hand a very translatable skill, but on the other hand a scenario that will only show up if he proves that he deserves to demand the ball in an NBA offense in the first place. His shots on these fouled possessions are also safe with his ability to not force a shot until he is sure that the foul is there. The issue is really that his foul drawing fixes some of the inside the arc pressure, but he needs to show ability to score inside the arc without the free throws in order to be given the ball in slow offensive sets and plays where he can generate said free throws. To be specific, his driving on these plays is often not as efficient (drive to rim is 0.96 points per possession which ranks tied for third to last with Acuff and Tanner, above Flemings and Anderson) and will lead to being iced out if he doesn’t get calls, so the overall foul line pressure comes from a delicate balance of specific slow PnRs and occasional drives. As a second option this will not be possible, as a first option he hasn’t shown outlier skills as of yet. The pessimism is a little overblown however, as Brown’s athletic profile seems solid in translating to rim finishing with his vertical ability and good size at his position paired with a first step that gets past his defender better than any guard on this list not named Flemings or Okorie.  

So if the scoring is not as big an issue as it seems, then the playmaking will be the next step for him to define an NBA role for himself, and there are flashes of brilliance dotted in between a lot of mediocre production. Driving gravity being low is hurt further by an average drive and kick profile, where he will take unnecessary risks to find small gaps and can turn the ball over as much as he makes insane reads.^(Fig 11) If the mistakes can be cleared up that opens up the driving more, otherwise this is another strike against his inside the arc efficiency. The part of the game where his playmaking is certain is on attacking closeouts where he will often make the right read and punish defenders that sag off of him in any circumstance. That is ancillary to PnR playmaking because of his projected role as a lead guard, and while there are flashes and efficiency positives on two man games, he simply does not have the frequency for this to be undeniable.^(Fig 6) The process gets even more worrying despite the eye test fluidity, as he often snakes PnRs into contested floaters and midrange shots, or more often, he will stall out in a short snake and make risky moves to get the ball out quick after not seeing an opening ([Youtube Link](https://youtu.be/CU3dD1XPq6A?t=626)). Sometimes Brown will simply stop in the middle of his ball handling movement on a PnR and be caught in no-man's land with two to three defenders around him in empty above the elbow positions. The experimentalism with his PnR is concerning wholly for an NBA team giving him the ability to learn lead guard skills to make use of his scoring profile. 

On defense is where he gets worse. The athletic profile is not bad as has been detailed above, but he has severe effort and IQ issues. Unlike Acuff falling asleep or being asked to not risk fouling, Brown has a propensity to completely slink away from defensive duties and give up poor off ball possessions in stretches of time where he is not being asked to run the offense and be caught out of position and lost in space when he is at least even slightly locked in at that end. Even at the end of close games, unlike an Acuff that will try his best and be burnt on the defensive end, Brown is nowhere to be seen and committing the same mistakes that has hurt his team the entire game. There just isn’t much to latch onto, where the positives are slim and the flaws are so abhorrent that Brown seems like a less scalable defensive prospect than any starter in the NBA.

Role-wise the current profile seems to indicate lead guard skills that will translate but leave holes when entering into the league which may never be filled, with few ancillary skills that connect to make him much more than a 6’5” shooter with no other true secondary skills, placing him firmly at the end of a rotation. Either he figures out the lead guard profile or he may be unlikely to translate seamlessly to the league. If the injuries did sap his athleticism and a return to health could provide better off ball skills, Brown does have a definite floor as an offense only off guard. Given the severity of back injuries in general, a healthy Brown is likely to have the athleticism necessary to show these skills. The unanswered big question is how healthy he can be.

Tyler TANNER

Tyler Tanner has not been discussed as much and the skillset seems to not be common knowledge so he is worthy of a longer introduction. While being the smallest (5’11”) in this group, Tanner plays much larger than his size on both sides of the ball. His above the rim finishing is in the top tier of this group with 6’5” Brown and 6’5” Burries and his defensive BLK% is third to only Flemings and Wagler (1.1 vs 1.3). The real question with Tanner is in his offensive profile, measuring closely to Acuff in most categories, the similar concerns to address being off ball role and shot selection with an emphasis on offensive portability. It might also be worth going over his defensive translation given the problems his size may introduce at the NBA level and going into detail about his finishing profile. 

Starting with the scoring and specifically inside the arc finishing, Tanner has one thing that similar small guards in this class do not. He has a great first step and handle combination to get around the man playing up on him on the perimeter (Streamable Link). On the other hand, a pessimistic view of his driving shows similar getting to the rim metrics as Acuff which, given the advantage of his twitchiness, shows the underdevelopment of Tanner’s other skills to find his way to the cup.^(Fig 10) When it comes to settling, Tanner is once again similar to Acuff and can find himself unable to get to the rim when he should and opt for lower efficiency shots.^(Fig 12) Instead of off balance touch based finishes like Acuff, Tanner chooses to shoot floaters and short midrange shots from slightly further away (still in the short midrange zone).^(Fig 7) The issue with these is a complete lack of an off hand. If Tanner is to keep his shot portfolio, he needs to develop counters to defenders forcing him to his weak hand. Furthermore, the issues with Acuff’s rim finishing are present with Tanner as well when it comes to translation to the NBA with respect to not having outlier skills that project to allow first option usage. In Tanner’s case the saving grace is the off ball ability he displayed, coming behind Stirtz and Burries for catch and shoot threes and perimeter cutting.^(Fig 9) The issue is that, once again, he doesn’t present outlier skills in these categories to be projected as an elite off ball weapon if some of his on ball offensive tools do not translate. In a worst case scenario where his driving production is diminished due to the weak hand concerns and small size driving limitations, Tanner will have to utilize his foul drawing even further. While Tanner and Brown have the best foul drawing in this group, Tanner utilizes more Philon-style patience to find contact slowly and can sometimes find himself stuck at the top of the paint with no moves remaining.^(Fig 13) These positions come with an added drawback of showcasing his midrange touch, or lack thereof. Statistically, he is better in these short midrange shots than anyone other than Philon (47.3% on more attempts to 51.4%), but the amount of these shots that come as a result of bumping defenders off to gain space is not something that is certifiably translatable to the NBA given his physical tools. Diving into the shot diet, Tanner does get better looks at scoring than anyone not named Okorie, but once again he will have to prove that he can do that in the NBA against stronger and faster defenders, at a bigger size disadvantage than anyone else in this group.^(Fig 7) The production is not so much the concern as the process is. The lack of long midrange shooting is also the biggest knock against scaling up to a surefire lead option (30.6% is second lowest to Brown’s 21.1%).

So if the scoring is hard to pick apart from a production standpoint and could translate, the barrier to being a lead guard in the NBA would be his playmaking profile. Tanner was both visually and statistically the best drive and kick passer in the group, often making reads from crowded paints and able to process openings before completing his drive to the rim.^(Fig 11) The issue is that he can be too timid when it comes to decision making, and outside of the stalling described above where he gets stuck near the free throw line, he can also pass up opportunities to shooters that look open. An issue with the Vanderbilt team he played with was the lack of true multi level scorers or corner shooters that he could feed. The most prolific shooter, Tyler Nickel, was an elite shooter throughout the year with volume coming from top of the arc and wing shooting and little closeout attacking.^(Fig 5) On drive and kicks, the first read to the corner was often the wrong read given personnel, but a choice that Tanner continued to make even after (what can only be hoped) a realization that this led to poor offense. PnRs were even worse, with a lack of rollers on the team and the complete extinction of lob conversion. At least Acuff’s passing profile resulted in outlier lob passing, Tanner’s flaws here held down his PnR efficiency to average. One thing worth noting is that Tanner’s raw assist numbers are not only lower due to poor use of advantage by his teammates, but also from a lack of assists off of resets. Miles would often be the release valve for a dead Tanner play and pound the air out of the ball for over half of the shot clock before making or missing a contested shot himself. The issue is less that Tanner struggles in certain playmaking scenarios, but rather that he did not (perhaps could not) display a full range of playmaking skills. The positive is that he made good use of snakes on PnR possessions to find space consistently and was fluid in a pass or score mode with high frequencies in all pass types while not sacrificing shot opportunities too much. Unfortunately, there just simply isn’t enough extraordinary production to be sure of his scalability in the NBA. The focus then shifts to his secondary playmaking skills which would be complemented by his high off ball scoring activity. Here he did showcase upside as Duke Miles had just as much usage as him and Tanner’s production at Vanderbilt was often a showcase of his tertiary duties with little shot clock usage. The scoring profile for Tanner also reflected the reality that he was able to function as an elite off ball shot diet efficiency player with good production on assisted attempts. Another noteworthy point is Tanner’s great transition efficiency without being transition reliant for his scoring or playmaking production (1.47 points per possession is 0.11 more than second place in the group who is 0.2 above last place).^(Fig 1, 2)

If Tanner is too questionable to be a lead option and is to find a secondary role in offense, the flaws have to be covered up by a good sized, midrange capable guard. If he is to be used as a primary initiator without developing other skills, then the secondary option needs to be a wing that can get off of the ball as well (unlike Duke Miles) and play with force. When deferring in either of these scenarios, Tanner will need to show shooting gravity on the ball to not be treated as a lesser threat. The off dribble three production is a slight concern, despite good space generation and touch, as he only displayed average ability here in this group.^(Fig 4) The dilemma is that shorter shooters are easier to contest and he will need to speed up his release or find more elevation on his jumper. The good news is that he already displays deep range and no dip ability in the corners, so there is precedent for him to improve. 

The size concerns rear their head on defense as well, but they are much more unfounded here. Despite shared lead guard duties in Vanderbilt, Tanner had the 27th highest steal rate in the country and did so while not gambling on defense. He switches correctly most of the time and can front bigs with success often, although this will be less applicable with the bigger functional size of NBA athletes. If he is targeted due to his size, his capable footwork to stay in front of the attacking player and outlier hands project to stop enough drives to remain useful on defense (there is a bigger jump in STL% from Tanner to 2nd place Flemings in this group then from Flemings to 2nd worst Wagler).^(Fig 3) Tanner also has great recovery instincts and speed for when he does mess up positioning off of the ball. The only issue is transition defense, where he will still generate at least one open court turnover a game, but he can often let runners by him to attempt to poke out the ball from behind. Besides the on ball steals, he also gathers a lot of deflections in passing lanes and from occasional quick hedges. There just isn’t much to poke holes in when it comes to his defensive role in the league, with an affinity for live ball turnovers that lead to the most valuable possessions in the NBA. It will be interesting to see if he can continue to not get bullied by NBA guards and if his mental acumen can continue to fill in for the brief periods of time he will spend guarding up to wings on switches. There’s also a tiny bit of Van Vleet style turbo-rabid wall-off-the-driver mode defense that pops up occasionally. 

Defense being a lesser issue, it will be up to his offensive translation in finding enough off ball improvement to slot in as a second option or finding ways to improve weak hand finishing and strength to solidify his inside the arc pressure. Neither of these are given and he may end up a Jamal Shead style bench utility piece, but the floor seems safe and the ceiling is still capable as a mid to low tier first option. He essentially ranks similar to Acuff on every metric with slight superiority and variability, he has great methodology tape comparable to or better than everyone else in the group, but his size could break all of that.

Intro

Darius Acuff

Kingston Flemings

Keaton Wagler

Labaron Philon

Mikel Brown

Tyler Tanner

Christian Anderson

Brayden Burries

Bennett Stirtz

Ebuka Okorie

Keaton WAGLER

Wagler gets cast as a high upside primary playmaker due to his standout efficiency and shooting ability; he is at/near the top of the class in shot diet efficiency, three point shooting, and free throw drawing. However, when it comes to athleticism, rim finishing, and general playmaking skills, there are some noticeable holes in his game that could make his floor negative as a primary option and unplayable as a secondary. 

Starting with the playmaking, Wagler in early season non-conference tape displayed wing ball handler duties with tertiary skills to Mirkovic and Boswell’s lead until he took over primary duties with Mirkovic when Boswell got hurt. This version of Wagler as a wing hid his loose handle in traffic and a tendency to pick up the ball early, especially as it led to a lot of deep shooting. Many of the plays Illinois ran for Wagler were similar to the sets Will Riley was given at the end of last year, and so there was a distinct lack of Jakucionis-like engine duties on his plate. When tasked with creating, Wagler was a very good drive decision maker on lower frequency, with poor metrics for gravity near the rim.^(Fig 1, 2) An even bigger issue with the good playmaker decision making metrics is that Mirkovic ended up running the actual top of the key offense on any non-PnR plays and Wagler ended up having poor passing efficiency on PnR plays, so the drive decision making that he succeeded at came from a place of selective opportunities and simplified kick out reads.^(Fig 3) It is worth noting that Illinois ran a NBA level spaced offense with a distinct shoot and rebound style of play that minimized what Wagler was able to showcase. A lot of passes to the wings, finding Gabe Davis in the corner, or hitting a trailing Ivisic twin makes for a concerning pass profile in comparison to his lead guard peers (Streamable Link). 

At the same time, the efficiency of the offensive scheme and personnel was definitely a crutch for Wagler’s underdeveloped self-creation; his offense showcased a lack of space creation and advanced ball handle moves paired with athletic struggles to shoot over or get around defenders. On paper Wagler had some of his best efficiency on off the dribble threes and showcased deep range, but the good players that have a shot diet propped up by deep threes with high isolation frequency have similarly high rim gravity.^(Fig 4, 5) Wagler can draw fouls like the listed names of iso shooting specialists, but the methodology there is not quite confidently translatable; he draws fouls based on pace manipulation, a skill that only a handful of players can consistently exploit in the league and most of them developed by building on to their base package of finding contact in traffic. It is worth noting that the Illinois offensive scheme both strove to not create cluttered lanes, but also to limit the personal responsibility of any one player to score. He does have a nice go to spin move (Youtube Link) that may serve as his only form of getting around NBA defenders at the start of his career and he will need it due to a complete lack of midrange volume. If there were to be a pivot to making Wagler a secondary playmaker, his off ball movement tendencies would be a concern with limited catch and shoot reps and even fewer cutting reps.^(Fig 6) If he is a lead ball handler he needs more reliable creation and PnR ability, if he is a top scoring small wing option then he needs off ball improvement. His off dribble threes also came from screens and from one of the best spaced offenses in the college game so with the playmaking ability not projecting with full confidence against NBA competition, the underlying processes being questionable, and the offensive role package being unclear (add on to that the athletic limitations in a slow first step and little vertical pop plus the increased athleticism of the NBA), he seems to be a large gamble on sustained improvement. 

The athleticism also hurts on the defensive end, but it isn’t just that. Even if he fills his frame and gets stronger, a 6’6” NBA player with slow feet is not a positive on defense physically. He doesn’t stay in front of drivers well, messes up switches often, and puts effort into the wrong plays. He will jab at the ball and not realize that the bigs aren’t currently in the paint leading to blow by possessions that are easy points. His attention is often constrained to one or two things on the court and he doesn’t process the floor around him, playing into being a bad off ball defender as well. The fact that he isn’t hunted all the time is only due to the struggles the Ivisic twins/Mirkovic have with PnR in all three of drop, switch, and hedge. On the positive side he rebounds well for his position and the effort may go a long way in future development. 

There isn’t enough connected high end production to see a clear NBA role, and the flaws aren’t debilitating enough to take away from the upside of his efficiencies. The general projection of his offensive engine capabilities are just not supportable with any evidence however, so outside of a gut feeling and a bet on development, there isn’t a star comparison for his profile. Without any change, Wagler is nearly useless in his current ability, but every flaw that is mitigated a smidge will alter his value dramatically. 

Labaron PHILON

As a two year college player, Philon has been an odd case in the contrast in duties between his freshman and sophomore years. There is an argument that he can play a secondary guard role with good defense based on his freshman year and that he can play a primary guard with less well rounded skills role according to his sophomore year profile, but the tendencies that have been picked up from his experience this year cause concern for the merging of these two skill sets. Beyond that, Philon’s role player floor may have been completely eroded by all the usage and defensive leeway given to him this year. 

To start with the scoring development in his game, the jump has been led by the improvement of his shooting form especially from three. Prior to this year, the only tools Philon had were the methodical driving abilities and the smart use of contact for foul drawing, without the decision making efficiency and shooting upside. Philon still has a rhythm problem with a foot shuffle tick (Streamable Link) before his shots, a one-two tap then shoot motion that precedes even a movement three. This limits his space generation in tighter windows and is a big reason he cannot or does not shoot long midrange shots.^(Fig 7) On upside evaluation, this is a flaw that will limit the amount of court he is a weapon from and should temper any shooting expectations out of the gates. Philon also isn’t the quickest or a vertically gifted athlete so the tendency to wait for defenders to get out of position and create the space for him is something that will translate even worse to the NBA. With that being said, his role could be projected comfortably as a secondary ball handler on offense, even with this year’s data, as he has some of the same efficiency production as Wagler, but on a better driving profile for both rim finishing and kicking out with just as good decision making.^(Fig 2, 1) That is the saving grace of an otherwise segmented offensive profile from the lack of off ball utility and non-existent midrange numbers. Really on a whole, Philon and Wagler have very similar offensive games with Wagler being the slightly better shooter to Philon’s better finishing. The same role concerns are also consequently there. The positives are that he has a much stronger handle than Wagler and can find balance on his way to the rim at all times. Returning to the driving, if a gap does not present itself within the first set of reads on the drive, Philon goes into his second set of play reset reads, which hinders fluidity and creates a vulnerability in his drives. Again the saving grace is the handle being good enough to keep him past the free throw line extended for a sizable amount of time and the good decision making yields statistical productivity regardless of the flawed process. The same production is not guaranteed in the NBA, but the floor of being a turnover prone poor driver is covered a bit.   

Then there’s the issue of playtypes compared to what his production slots him as role-wise in the NBA. He has a good PnR with Sherrell and kicks out on drives with solid efficiency, good volume, and great decision making; the issue is that he’s not elite at any of these to make for a reliable first option. His freshman year had more usage as a tertiary handler to Mark Sears and the similar passing profile on non-PnR then was more enticing than the current less than extraordinary profile as a lead handler. The issue is that there will be someone that is better at every single pass type on any team he gets drafted to, and unlike Wagler, he could be given more on ball reps to mask shooting concerns that will lead to him struggling to showcase true lead potential. The positive is the wing based two man game with Sherrell that showcased quick decision-making and versatile passing angles, Sherrell would set a deep screen (Youtube Link) near the elbow and roll early while Philon rejected to the deep wing or back towards the top of the arc leading to an open angle to find Sherrell for the dunk or a clear lane behind him when he relocated to the corner. Those are the kinds of plays that will translate and lead to Philon maintaining value on the floor without addressing the flaws in his offensive game immediately, while also continuing to have value even if he becomes a secondary ball handler.

Just like Wagler again, the athleticism concerns bleed into the defense. He used to stay in front of his man and use a low center of gravity with good balance to stop drives from reaching the rim without help from a big and he used to read his man well. This year’s added offensive load ended up moving Philon off ball on defense to be hidden on the worst shooting wing and even then he was a non-factor. This section of his game is the biggest swing since of the two samples we’ve seen, one was an ideal lesser small defender in an NBA lineup and the other was a liability in any defensive role. The gamble for a lottery pick is whether he can return to last year’s defensive role and effort while keeping the offensive improvements and adding on to it. At the very least, he doesn’t have the same bust potential as the certain no-defense guards, but he has a very confusing two year sample.

Intro

Darius Acuff

Kingston Flemings

Keaton Wagler

Labaron Philon

Mikel Brown

Tyler Tanner

Christian Anderson

Brayden Burries

Bennett Stirtz

Ebuka Okorie

Darius ACUFF

The first name for many people in this guard class is Darius Acuff. The background of Acuff’s season and play has been detailed to death so it will be skipped in the interest of maintaining some cohesive brevity. The big question is generally about his defensive ability and size, but it seems that a bigger issue could be his offensive portability given the lack of standout defensive ability or size. 

Seeing his first option/offensive engine numbers at Arkansas, the first issue with his ability to maintain value in the NBA is the passing level. Most of the halfcourt non-lob reads he makes are quite basic and require little ability and lots of usage, also paired with lots of time of possession with Acuff’s slower processing speed (compared to offensive engines)Streamable Film. His drives are commonly out of control and he ends up off balance near the rim, finishing with jumpers or runners where he should be getting rim finishes.^(Fig 1) This problem rears its head for several other guard prospects, but that doesn’t make it any less troubling for someone who is being primed to be a primary scorer in the league. An especially egregious example of these driving miscues was against Ole Miss in the conference tournament where the 4th quarter consisted of Acuff driving head-down blinders-on or giving the ball up outside of the arc to Billy Richmond to reset the whole play for a majority of the shot clock. This isn’t controlling the offense or slowing the pace, but instead grinding the possessions down to a halt and obtaining low percentage opportunities for your own team. The lack of dump offs to bigs on these drives and even the hesitancy to kick out seems to be a severe lack of secondary playmaking and due to a lack of feel from Acuff. There is a precedent for him to develop secondary playmaking skills given his usage in college, but the question becomes why you would spend a lottery pick in this draft on a bet like that. Acuff has okay touch on these off-balance shots, but he’s neither good enough to take them on an NBA team or selective enough with these shots to not hinder an NBA offense.^(Fig 2) Compared to someone like Philon who similarly takes a lot of floaters and runners the important difference is the lack of fluidity in pass or score decision making where Acuff gets stuck in the mode of one or the other.^(Fig 3)

 
Returning to the main issue commonly discussed with Acuff, the defense is truly lackluster in all aspects. High block rates for his position highlight a tendency to gamble more than a secondary rim protection potential, falling asleep constantly off ball is a clear issue in any NBA scheme and minimal effort on ball is at the very least not a sign of confidence in any kind of defensive translation to the NBA. That being said, there is a decent bit of negative tape that can be attributed to outside factors and/or covered up in the NBA. His minimal on ball effort is almost certainly a direct result of his herculean offensive load and the gamble heavy defense bleeds into Arkansas coach Calipari’s defensive focus on turnover generation above all. This doesn’t excuse low steal rates despite the emphasis on turnover generation and a decent amount of the effort lapses are not in the hopes of staying out of foul trouble, but the overall defensive showing is worse than what Acuff can really do in the NBA. The biggest yet unknown factor will be his athletic profile in the NBA, as his defensive peak will be further limited by his speed and vertical pop. While being built like a tree stump from the torso up, Acuff has a very tough time initiating or maintaining contact on either end of the floor, similarly having very low lateral and horizontal burst and top end speed. Vertically, he struggles to elevate for dunks or blocks at the rim, instead generating his block numbers on the perimeter by catching shot attempts early and/or from behind. None of these athletic factors seem like a boon for Acuff’s defensive chances in the league and will most likely hinder him from seeing the floor in many situations long term. Defense is something that can be hidden or trained in the right circumstances, so once again the viability of Acuff being on the floor is a bet on development and chance. 

Continuing with the athleticism issues, the lack of burst and strength really limit the scoring chances created. The paint touches are a serious concern as he tends to finish right outside of the paint and very rarely gets to the rim, which is compounded by the fact that his 3 point rate and free throw rate seem to have no correlation with each other and no consistency in general.^(Fig 4, 5) If he’s not making threes, not drawing fouls, and not getting to the paint, the scoring is a huge liability in the NBA. In many of the late game clutch moments of this past season, Acuff started heaving threes that landed short showing that the superhuman stamina to run the engine is also just not there yet. All of these are severe red flags that could impact his NBA production at the ceiling. The midrange reliance is also a shot selection nightmare considering the struggles he has to generate space and will therefore have to shoot the same midrange selection over a considerably larger defensive assignment. He toned down his midrange shot selection throughout the year and was much more poised at the tail end of the season, but the lack of generated space is a worry nonetheless. Then there’s the P&R reliance to generate looks at all, along with the lack of pocket passing tools to run P&Rs with variation, Arkansas ran PnR 24% of the time with Acuff being the ball handler 69% of those according to BBall Index and HoopExplorer, Acuff passed out of PnR 11 possessions per 100 and so only 5.5 possessions per 100 ended up as PnR scoring opportunities. Much more often, Acuff is found running a two man game off the left wing and making dump offs off of slow methodical snake dribbling to a hot midrange spot. This hasn’t been an NBA level offensive set for over a decade and there is no outlier efficiency on this type of play to denote any usage of this play being applicable to Acuff in the league. The P&R then becomes his only scoring play type and the lack of playmaking in fully utilizing the rolling big makes for some issues that only get magnified when he enters score only or pass only mode. A big reason Trae Young has lost much value over the past few years is a complete fall off in isolation efficiency. On a high end outcome, Acuff could become the passer Young is (after making leaps in several areas), he has a slightly better defensive profile than Young despite worse results so far, but the isolation scoring will inevitably end up limiting the ceiling even further of Acuff. Athletic positives include good body control and very light feet. 

Despite the negative nature of much of the findings above, the reality of Acuff is that he has the basis to be a boom or bust (not draft bust) offensive engine. No prospect comes into the draft fully perfect and many a flawed prospect has ended up climbing into the uppermost tier of the NBA. The flaws highlight just how much betting on improvement and change is needed for Acuff to return good value in a lottery pick, but a bet that pays off is a genius call in hindsight. These concerns of low floor inducing holes in a guards game is not unique to Acuff however.

Kingston FLEMINGS

Flemings has a much different profile to that of Acuff’s, being touted as a defense first, safe, on and off ball combo guard. Once again the statistical profile has been discussed enough, but the underlying portfolio of skills doesn’t quite match the narrative around his play. With Flemings, the oddities come from his inaction in parts of games where he seems to disappear from any role on the court at all. The big question is what his motor, feel, and skillset leads into as an NBA role. 

Primarily a lottery guard is drafted to be a lead guard and that is what Flemings is billed to be. Off ball shooting and cutting is not a part of his skill set as shown in college.Fig 6 Concerns about Fleming in a lead guard role are, beyond the obvious of not having the highest usage, his tendency to bring the ball up and defer to Uzan or another initiator and his rigid mode flipping of pass only and score only. Often Flemings will bring up the ball and after two or three handoffs will end up with the action starting on the wing near midcourt, not really a traditional start point for a lead guard. The shot clock situations and play types from this area of the floor are quite similar to Andrew Nembhard’s secondary ball handler role in Haliburton’s Pacers offense where he is given free reign on broken plays or stalling offenses. This is quite valuable as outlined in the introduction, but the reads Flemings makes from these positions is not exceptional enough to put him above the names on the secondary playmaking chart, most of whom are bench players not quite worth a lottery pick.Fig 7 The concern is that Flemings doesn’t break down defenses from the top of the key often and with advanced reads as much as he passes to the open guys on a play, even though that is a great skill and the passes he makes are not necessarily easy to throw.

Then there are the scoring issues as both a lead guard role and ancillary option, with reliance on midrange, unenthusiastic three point shooting, and inconsistent rim finishing. The form and comfort to get into the midrange is evident and outcome numbers corroborate that, but this is an add-on as a scoring skill in the NBA as far as helping teammates in any way. Besides the escape valve nature of being able to make tough shots in the midrange, this shot profile and relative inability to score from the two zones (rim and beyond the arc) that require defense to pay attention to a player yields low space production and little offensive productivity. Very few midrange merchants float around the NBA without other off ball guard offensive skills. Flemings never really grew out of his early season stop and pop for midrange tendencies and the biggest headscratcher was his movement role in Kelvin Sampson’s Houston offense. Outside of the lack of cutting, movement threes and corner threes were a rarity, and the lack of use as a 3 when Sharp/Uzan/Cenac and Tugler or Sakho were on the floor is a concern for how well he can translate to a variable role.^(Fig 6) One non-shooter in these lineups would mean that Flemings would have free reign to find gaps in opposing defenses near the rim, but instead these possessions ended up with more midrange shot selections or non-involvements in plays. If Sharp were to be considered the 3, then on possessions where Flemings didn’t handle the ball he would still be playing an offball role as a secondary shooter and thus inspired to find space inside the arc. Given that he will (as with anyone else) have off nights as an on ball creator, the pivot to a different offensive role is nonexistent. The lead guard scoring concerns come from the profile of shots he excels at as noted above, but also from a lack of free throw drawing, where contrary to some belief, pace-controlled and crafty midrange work is often the primary mechanism to draw fouls for the league's top merchants (SGA, Harden, Doncic, Butler, Booker, Derozan). If Flemings is as athletic as he is discussed to be, he should either be finishing at a better rate or drawing fouls on drive attempts to somehow save his shot profile into some NBA role category.^(Fig 4, 8) 

The athleticism doesn’t only affect his offensive game, the safe floor he is projected to have is based on a combination of his athleticism and defensive ability, but a functional combination of the two of these hasn’t materialized in the tape or on paper. Defense for a guard is based on having good hands, having speed to keep up, walling off, and the feel to make the right decisions in positioning; a combination of three of these is enough to be a good defender. Flemings’ frame is too slight to understand the full capacity of his strength and so the lack of walling off is only a question mark at the moment. But again the limited usage, this time as a point of attack defender, is yet another case of him not having the opportunity to display the assets that could make him a good NBA defender. On the positive side Flemings has great turnover generation and solid off-ball team defense to make court position reads, as well as a knack for transition defense which is incredibly valuable in the league. With all of this being taken into account, a hypothetical question that pops into mind is the value of a great defender like Derrick White (who also excels at similar things to Flemings but has some extra skills) without the walling off or shot blocking ability. It is also worth noting that defense is one of the hardest things to fully project from college to the league, especially for guards.