The Constellation of Connectors

Note: this article was originally published at The Stepien on April 14, 2022

What is a “Connector”?

The term “connector” has risen in popularity in draft circles in recent years, but what does it mean?

The obvious, most semantic definition would be similar to “glue guys”, perhaps with more emphasis on passing. You connect one player to another by passing effectively. Simple enough. But for this piece, I want to apply the broadest rubric possible as a way to isolate all combinations of “connecting” qualities found in prospects.

To do that I used a couple favorite all-in-one metrics to see who was providing value in the NBA in the current season: EPM and DRIP. Both use a combination of box score, lineup and tracking data to estimate player value, the primary difference being EPM is an estimate of impact for a single season while DRIP is a forecast metric.

With these metrics I sorted top-down to find the players viewed most favorably who neither 1.) Use more than one isolation possession per game and 2.) Do not lead their team in shots contested at the rim. My goal in this was to separate the rare, traditional “stars” of the game from those providing value in more covert ways. This does not preclude connecting prospects from becoming stars in their own right, but does help us isolate different sources of value from various skillsets.

With that, we have our list of premier NBA connectors. Among our list of top 18 connectors we can identity basic archetypes, and the skillsets that give them their value. Passing and defensive consistency were the essential common ingredients, a layer to add on to and amplify any other skills. The tricky aspect is how connectors derive much value in making their teammates look better than themselves, more noteworthy for their lack of mistakes than any obvious advantage creations.

With this backdrop and after watching tape of current NBA connectors, I sorted through a list of current NBA prospects. With a minimum statistical filter conducted through https://barttorvik.com based on college production for our NBA connectors, the resulting list was quite long and varied: I watched over 100 prospects for this piece, with patterns for contribution becoming more obvious with the more tape I watched. Below are my findings.

Archetype #1: The Physical Table Setter

NBA Examples: Marcus Smart, Derrick White, John Konchar

Core Competencies: Steals, Assists, Free Throw Attempts

Baseline Requirements: Consistent, ever-present physicality plus mobility with enough skill to punish openings

Connects: Guard finishers and big finishers

Teams with Need: Minnesota, Philadelphia, Milwaukee

Summary: The best framework I have from this archetype is these are the ‘ugly/beautiful’ players. It doesn’t matter how pretty their game looks aesthetically as long as it’s effective. They are not necessarily shooters, with enough consistent physicality on both sides to contribute in the interior and perimeter as needed, but it doesn’t hurt either. These players get into your body, creating space with core strength despite being guards or more mobile wings.

They connect the finishing prospects in two ways: reducing their teammates’ defensive workloads and punishing open lanes on offense. If you have a guard and a big with gravity, there will be openings, and these players will attack them to either collapse the tilted defense to then create another opening, or finish at the rim with the extra space. “Play finishing” types are often weaker on defense, with workload tilted towards the offensive end. Allowing finishers to relax on defense gives a huge advantage to elevate their specialized skill set.

Prospects With a Chance to Thrive as Physical Table Setters:

1. Alondes Williams, Wake Forest

Alondes is the top Physical Table Setter in this class due to his combination of passing, physical strength and finishing. While his high turnover rate isn’t ideal, his chaotic play-style works well for the archetype.

No guard is better at finishing than Williams in this class, with defenders bouncing off of him on drives to the rim. He shot 66% at the rim despite self-creating 3/4ths of those looks. Williams’ 25 dunks over the season is extremely rare for a player who also maintained a >30% assist rate.

The biggest flaw in meeting this archetype is Alondes does not consistently lock in on defense to the degree of his NBA PTT predecessors, but I believe with decreased on-ball usage (he was 15th in usage rate among high major players) he could ramp up that intensity. Most important is how he has the physical tools and instincts to be a playmaker on both sides of the ball.

While his shooting could use some work – 28% from three, 44% on deep twos, 69% from the line – with the other ways he contributes, it should be good enough to earn some minutes. His baseline of physicality and versatility allow several routes to success under this archetype with some fine-tuning around the edges.

2. Dyson Daniels, G-League Ignite

Daniels is someone I’ve written about at length in the past, a high-processing prospect with nevertheless some major question marks around his scoring. But with passing and defense of rare quality for an 18-year old, and a consistent display of both over a pro season, I believe he has a safe floor as contributor under this connecting archetype.

Daniels is as much a Physical Table Setter on defense as anyone in this class, with great awareness leading to help steals and blocks with impeccable timing. Even against opposing borderline NBA players in the G-League, Daniels places in the 90th %ile for steal rate among prospects with two per game in addition to just under one block. He also places near the 90th %ile for assist rate, and over that for assist-to-turnover ratio, an effective and at times quite creative passer, especially thriving in transition hit-aheads and drive and kick.

The glaring issue with Daniels, keeping him from first under this archetype, is his tendency to shy away from contact at the rim in spite of his growth spurt to 6’7’’. His handle lags that of other major guard prospects, though savvy nature means very few turnovers because of it, but regardless lacks the confidence to drive his body into opponents to finish. While his floater is a great tool, he overuses it instead of developing the needed finishing craft. Playing in the midst of a growth spurt can be deceiving in not knowing you can pull off moves you couldn’t previously, so hopefully Daniels can continue to make the mental adjustment to his new size. Given his productivity as one of the youngest players in the G-League, I have confidence in that working out over time.

3. Johnny Davis, Wisconsin

Davis became one of my favorite players to watch over this process, typically lauded more for his scoring abilities than as a connector. But his high intensity on both sides of the floor, combined with constant physicality and baseline of passing and driving skill make him a prime candidate for the archetype.

While Davis has a lower assist and steal rate than either Daniels or Williams, he is still around average in both while carrying a huge offensive burden for a poorly-spaced Wisconsin team. With few other play finishers around him, Davis’ connecting aspects are likely underrated by his context.

The tape is excellent for Johnny, aggressively chasing around screens and working with double and triple teams to still get to the rim. He looks like an absolute nightmare to play against, representing the ugly/beautiful moniker perfectly in his effective brutality. He is the best rebounder of any prospect under this archetype, giving him a leg up in starting the break while also highlighting his plus physical attributes.

4. Bennedict Mathurin, Arizona

The final Physical Table Setter prospect with a ‘likely’ tag, Mathurin is limited by his handle in getting him to all spots of the floor as is required for this archetype, but with undeniable physical tools to fit the bill.

While he has little precision to his game aside from his jump shot (which is very good at 37% from three on high volume), Mathurin is strong, quick and a great vertical athlete, making him a physical workload to play against. He dunks constantly, very physical attacking the basket where handle permits.

While he lacks the high level of defensive awareness of Daniels, Davis, and maybe even Williams, his elite physical tools give him the ability to fight through screens as well as any big guard in the class. With his athletic versatility you can never fully count him out of a play, which gets at the answer we’re looking for.

His passing is also more functional than elite, but that’s okay and something to build upon as a young sophomore, still only 19, and a strong 1.4 assist-to-turnover rate means he knows how to take care of the ball in spite of any skill limitations.   

Prospects With a Chance to Contribute as Physical Table Setters:

Kendall Brown, Baylor (Secondary Archetype: 3&D Wing); David Roddy, Colorado State

KB is docked to the ‘unlikely to thrive, but still a chance to contribute’ section mostly due to his seemingly poor awareness on the defensive end. It is difficult to excel in this archetype without constantly ticking a lot of boxes, and that consistency is something Brown has struggled with in his very young career. Nevertheless, his physical tools are astounding, perhaps the best vertical athlete in the class with good strength for his age as one of the youngest prospects in the draft.

But much as I wrote about Brown in my rim protector piece, physical tools like his don’t come around often, so it’s difficult to truly count him out for either this role or as a 3&D Wing connector (more on that to come).

Roddy is a much more skilled player, though older at 21, with limitations instead from the athletic side. Roddy meets the highest statistical thresholds of those mentioned above, the undisputed leader of the #2 team in the Mountain West.

He is an exceptional passer and shooter, grading among the best in both in college hoops. However, Roddy operates with a lot of time on the ball, giving him time to find openings which is a luxury less likely to exist in an NBA system. Roddy is a good vertical athlete and tough to move with his strong build, but not the quickest or most agile, making him a non-factor around screens which is a major issue for this archetype.

Outside Chance but Still a Shot as Physical Table Setters:

Kevin Cross, Tulane

Archetype #2: The Body Bagger

NBA Examples: Draymond Green, Domantas Sabonis, Kevon Looney

Core Competencies: Defensive Rebounds, Assists-to-Turnovers, Steals, 3PAs

Baseline Requirements: Getting into opponent’s body at all costs, clever positioning and good feel for court geometry. As much as any connector, absent of mistakes

Connects: Guard finishers and wing finishers

Teams with Need: Dallas, Washington, Los Angeles Clippers

Summary: Body Baggers are the archetype least reliant on athleticism in the traditional sense, more reliant on cunning, using physical strength to create space and passing from all angles. Screening is an essential component, creating space for themselves as distributors and scorers running off them.

These players have more guard skills than most bigs while also being physical enough on defense to hold their own while contributing on the glass. They don’t have to be good shooters, but an effective three or even midrange shot can be critical in allowing them to be a full offensive hub (see: Sabonis).

The ideal Body Bagger operates at the top of the key, capable of high-low entry passes if playing next to a true big as well as hitting cutters and shooters running off screens.

Prospects With a Chance to Thrive as Body Baggers:

1. Jeremy Sochan, Baylor

The 6’9’’ 18-year-old is an easy call for top Body Bagger prospect even in a crowded field. Sochan has one of the highest feels for the game of anyone in the class, especially notable for his young age. As seen in his ability to guard both up and down, he is extremely technical with positioning, always maximizing his strength and quickness in a variety of conditions. The more you focus in on the details, the better he looks.

Sochan’s statistical profile is impressive, elite in steal rate, defensive rebounding, finishing and free throw rate, while also getting a good amount of threes up. Though his percentages look suspect, they still rates well for the archetype, particularly his willingness to shoot.

His passing stands out in the variety of ways he is able to hit cutters and shooters, exactly what we need for this role and amplified by his willingness to shoot and ability to finish – the latter a trait none of our NBA examples exemplified to Sochan’s level in college.

His defensive versatility doesn’t approach Draymond-esque as no one’s does, but his ability to get in an immediate advantageous position against a wide variety of matchups in the NCAA is promising for his NBA translation. Watching Sochan intently you see him get positioning on rebounds early and optimally, getting first into the (often bigger) opponent’s body to carve out his space. Sochan flat-out does not look like an 18-year-old save for occasional over-confidence in his just-okay handle. His type of prowess in the details far beyond his years gives him pole position for this archetype.

The one minor quibble is how Sochan is a little undersized compared to Green, Sabonis and Looney, nor is he at this point near the level of screen-setter needed for this role. But as a broad-shoulder freshman who enjoys initiating contact, I trust him to get there quickly.

2. Daron Holmes II, Dayton

Secondary Archetype: Vertical Dominator

Holmes is another freshman mature beyond his years, providing Dayton with a constant physical presence in his 6’10’’, 220-lb frame. Holmes is not the passer Sochan is, but is the first featured player to possess the traits of a secondary archetype, a compelling vertical threat as one of the best dunkers, shot blockers and rim finishers in college hoops.

Holmes gets much more utility than Sochan as a pure screener, and though has the much lower assist rate is relatively mistake-free for a freshman with a positive assist-to-turnover ratio. While he doesn’t get many steals, his constantly active hands block routes and welcomes a challenge from any opponent, causing havoc all over the court on defense.

Daron was flat-out a very good basketball player on a good Dayton basketball team, ranking fourth among all freshmen in Box Plus-Minus. While it doesn’t always look pretty, Holmes is able to use effort and positioning to meander to the rim using every tool available to him in a way that suggests an obvious high-feel player, and allows him to meet many core competencies for this type quite easily.

He fits this archetype in a more similar to Kevon Looney than the other two NBA predecessors, a long, versatile defender who can execute short roll passes even if not conducting the entire offense at times like Draymond. While Holmes’ athleticism and offensive skill are closer to good than great, he is extremely disciplined, again like Looney, primed to allow opponents to make mistakes for him. That’s a great foundation for a connector.

3. Jabari Walker, Colorado

Secondary Archetype: 3&D Wing

Walker had a tough season, his second year with a Colorado team which finished fourth in the Pac-12. With few play finishers around him (Colorado was 234th in threes made per game and outside the top 100 for offenses in the NCAA), my feeling watching Jabari’s tape is he has become quite underrated for his connective properties.

Walker has gotten little attention on many mainstream draft boards, with his Box Plus-Minus just barely exceeding my minimum threshold for this exercise, but I believe he has a good chance to succeed not just as a Body Bagger, but potentially as a 3&D Wing as well. He put up the most threes per 100 possessions of anyone I’m including under the Body Bagger archetype, and has good form shooting 40% from deep and 78% from the line over his two college seasons.

To focus on him as a Body Bagger, Walker has a solid frame at 6’9’’ and 215 pounds and has an ideal game stylistically for this archetype. He’s a creative passer with functional handle and shot, and simply put, a guy I’d be more than comfortable with making decisions from the top of the key with shooters around him. His poor assist-to-turnover ratio and true shooting I attribute more to poor context and overworked usage: it’s important to remember that, especially for connectors, their context will only improve in the NBA as they amplify existing skill on the team around them rather than create a lot for themselves.

To comment on him as a 3&D connector, Walker could also be scaled down to primarily a spot up shooter with some closeout attacking ability, and has the strength and athleticism to be a very good defender of big wings. Those two routes to success, in addition to some potential self-creation and rim protection ability, make him an easy top-40 prospect in the 2022 draft in my mind.

4. Jonathan Tchamwa Tchatchoua, Baylor

Tchawmwa Tchathoua, more than any other prospect, perfectly embodies the Body Bagger ethos. While he may not have the same upside as a prospect as those listed above, JTT could still carve out an NBA role due to how perfectly he outlines this archetype. He is an incredible screen setter, agile and active enough to constantly flip hips to the perfect angle, and is an effective enough passer, dribbler and finisher out of the short roll.

Hand placement within a play is key for the Body Bagger, and Tchawma Tchatchoua’s is excellent. Baylor was five points better per 100 possessions on defense with JTT on the court, even with their stock of good defenders in his absence. JTT suffered a knee injury midway through the season that drastically reduced Baylor’s repeat championship odds, and likely means he’ll return for another year with Baylor, but his clear-cut adherence to this role at the college level gives me confidence in him having utility at the next level.

5. Jack Nunge, Xavier

Nunge is the oldest players we’ll talk about in this article as a 23-year old fifth-year, but as such has a fully developed skillset that suits this archetype well. Nunge is an agile 6’11’’, and while he lacks the big frame needed to be a great NBA screener, has all the ancillary skills of savvy passing, good handle, good hands and added bonus of great shooting. Nunge was above 60th %ile for both three point attempt rate and three point percentage and shot 49% on deep twos in addition to 37% from three and 71% from the line.

While his lack of core strength is a concern keeping him from NBA starter contention, I think Nunge could be a valuable backup in the Body Bagger role. His saving grace is very quick hands, which, in combination with quick feet and good activity, make him a constant thorn in the side of opponents, allowing no easy space on either end despite subpar lateral quickness. Even with his slender frame, he can be quite aggressive attacking the rim, with some midrange finishing craft to add on.

With his effective shooting from distance (92nd %ile on spot up) and capable handle, Nunge adds a closeout-attacking element while still serving the basic Body Bagger functions, a useful combination.

6. Jaylin Williams, Arkansas

The Body Bagger archetype is the deepest of the categories, as evinced by Jaylin only coming in at 6th place. Williams is perhaps the best passer of the group, or at least the most capable of making extremely high-value reads. He was effectively in the Body Bagger+ archetype already for Arkansas, as they often ran the offense through him in the high post to then feed cutters running around him.

The reason Williams isn’t higher is I fear he may be lacking the ancillary skills to make him a starter through this archetype, a subpar shooter and just mediocre athlete. He provided most of his defensive value through a blistering rate of charges drawn at multiple per game, a sign of great positioning but perhaps covering for some other limitations. He strikes me as just a mediocre to poor vertical athlete, and lacking the physical strength of Walker, Holmes or Tchamwa Tchatchoua.

But any passer of Williams’ caliber almost certainly has a high feel for the game, the most essential quality for this archetype. While not explosive attacking the rim, he does have impeccable footwork on the roll to find his way to the rim in elegant fashion, though shot poorly when he got there.

7. Orlando Robinson, Fresno State

Once again, we have an embarrassment of riches for this type of connector in the 2022 class. Robinson has the best handle for size of anyone mentioned so far in this piece and is an extremely good passer with an over 20% assist rate. In addition, he’s as good of a shooter as Jabari Walker or Jack Nunge, giving him the full offensive versatility needed to thrive as a Body Bagger. He has a big frame allowing him to make effective screens, as well. Robinson is one of the few seven-footers I would trust to bring the ball down in transition, a sign of the level of faith I have in him making NBA-level decisions with the ball.

The issues come from his mediocre athleticism and often absent-minded rotations on defense. In that vein Robinson projects closest to a bench version of Sabonis, where less can be more on defense, focusing on using his strength for effective on-ball D and saving the energy to maximize his offensive talents. I believe Robinson’s context at Fresno State did him no favors, with poor guard play limiting his easy buckets inside and tasked with immense creation responsibilities. With better offensive weapons around him, Robinson could look better and make his teammates thrive.

Prospects With a Chance to Contribute as Body Baggers:

Johnni Broome, Morehead State; Azuolas Tubelis, Arizona; Trevion Williams, Purdue; Adama Sanogo, Connecticut; Nelly Junior Joseph, Iona

Once again, we have an onslaught of potentially capable Body Baggers in this class.

While Broome seems likely to stay in college after entering the transfer portal, I have to give him a shout here as one of the more interesting Body Bagger prospects. He has incredible hands and is super smart with positioning, an ideal size of 6’10’’, 235 lbs with a strong frame for a sophomore. The main item holding him back is lack of scoring options with poor shooting touch, but his innate ability to get into an opponents’ body make him a very interesting prospect in this archetype.

Tubelis would be the result of averaging out most Body Bagger traits, with the issue being a lack of standing out in any particular category, capping his upside as likely just a bench connector. He had the benefit of having Christian Koloko as a high-low partner and Mathurin as a kick-out recipient, giving him some easy assists though also demonstrating effective connective passing. Tubelis is a good screener and decent rebounder, but lacks some polish when trying to pull off anything too complicated. Regardless, his positioning is generally very good and he has a good sense of body leverage in general. He’s still young as just recently turned 20, so perhaps has some more upside (maybe even as a shooter) to come.

Trevion Williams makes some of the most eye-popping passes of anyone in this class, but unfortunately has some major question marks for me, keeping him from being an elite Body Bagger prospect. While he has elite passing accuracy to find cutters in the tiniest of passing windows, he has more leeway to do so than perhaps anyone else on this list, able to sit with the ball for entire possessions until he finds an openings. This luxury will not exist in the NBA, and I believe his lack of athleticism will show up more dramatically as well. He still has great hands on defense to get some difficult steals, meaning he could earn minutes off a bench at some point, but I have hesitancy in his ability to have any role bigger than that.

Finally, we come to Iona’s Nelly Junior Joseph who, despite being the least consistently locked in of anyone in this group, has such natural Body Bagger abilities at age 20 that I can’t rule out him rising up the ranks. Physicality comes very naturally to the NBA Academy product, with opponents nearly bouncing off him by accident. This ability earns him the best free throw rate of anyone on this list, and when added in with some high-end passing flashes and great rebounding ability, makes him the Body Bagger poster boy in this piece’s cover photo. It’s rare for someone with the lapses Junior Joseph has to make it in this role, but if he can refine the rough edges, look out.

Outside Chance but Still a Shot as Body Baggers:

Paolo Banchero, Duke; Roko Prkacin, KK Cibona

This has to be the only time Paolo finds himself as the bottom of a list which includes some of the names above, as a legitimate threat to go first overall in the 2022 draft. He will primarily be a creator, of course, but having some potential as a Body Bagger shows Banchero has multiple paths to contribute on an NBA floor. His lack of consistent effort and attention to the details as a screener hold him back, but should he learn to use his physicality better it could unlock some truly rare upside in combination with his creation ability.

Archetype #3: The Vertical Dominator

NBA Examples: Jarrett Allen, Robert Williams, John Collins, Larry Nance Jr.

Core Competencies: Blocks, Dunks, Rim Finishing, Offensive Rebounds

Baseline Requirements: Not just being a great vertical athlete but knowing when and how to commit while providing a baseline of skills and physicality elsewhere on the court. Be an elite lob threat, but not at the sacrifice of versatility

Connects: Traditional guards and wing finishers

Teams with Need: Charlotte, Detroit, Brooklyn

Summary: For Vertical Dominators, rim gravity comes as second nature. While traditionally not considered connectors compared to the passing specialists, they effectively “connect” the ball to the rim against a scrambled defense, giving room for shooters on the wing to operate by dragging in the help.

Beyond being great leapers, Vertical Dominators are made elite by having a baseline of passing ability as well as lateral quickness to guard down if necessary. All of our NBA examples above meet those criteria to differing levels of competency.

Prospects With a Chance to Thrive as Vertical Dominators:

1. Jalen Duren, Memphis

Secondary Archetype: Body Bagger

I wrote about Duren at length as, alongside Chet Holmgren (more on him soon), one of the elite rim protection prospects in this class. While there is a clear overlap between rim protection and this archetype, namely ability to get blocks, Duren also checks all the boxes on the offensive end while being one of the most versatile defensive prospects in general, rim protector or not. First off, Duren is a flat-out incredible vertical athlete, with his great wingspan, quick leaping and max vertical. It is difficult to throw a lob out of range for the big, even if he ends up measuring only 6’9-10’’ rather than his listed 6’11’’. Beyond that, he’s incredibly strong for being the youngest prospect in the class, with great hands to guide the ball to the basket. Duren would also qualify as a decent chance to be a Body Bagger with his constant physicality and good passing instincts and accuracy. Memphis lacked proper spacing and guard play, limiting Duren’s assist numbers and use as a pure roll threat as I believe both will look spectacular in an NBA system. With broad shoulders and decent footwork, it’s easy to picture him becoming one of the best screeners in the league as well.

2. Chet Holmgren, Gonzaga

Secondary Archetype: 3&D Wing

Yes, Chet is also a great prospect not just for his rim protection abilities but for his potential use as a versatile roll threat as well, and on top of that has the unique ability to contribute as 3&D Wing connector, a type we will get into later in this piece. He ranks lower here for a reason you likely suspect, that his frame will not allow him to be as consistent of a roll threat through traffic as Duren (as shown by Chet’s lower free throw and offensive rebound rates). But Holmgren has similar good passing ability for a big, if not better, and an incredible standing reach at 7’2’’, 7’6’’ wingspan where he can catch lobs by barely leaping. He is not as quick of a leaper nor does he have the same vertical as Duren, but you effectively get to the same place with his unique length while still having great hands and finishing abilities. Holmgren shot 84% at the rim, best in all of college basketball this season and a top-10 mark of anyone since 2010 with as many attempts. His three point shooting is rare among this archetype, the only one in the set with both good volume and percentages. While he may not have the same “primary” equity as most prospects at the top of any given draft, this unique combination of connecting from all points of the court makes him the ideal pairing for basically any type of traditional star. Put him next to a traditional big and space him out to the three point line; put him as your primary frontcourt presence and let him catch easy lobs cutting to the basket. That kind of flexibility will make GMs look good as it would be difficult for him to not find a valuable role in good lineups.

3. Ismael Kamagate, Paris Basketball

Kamagate is familiar with his grouping next to Duren and Holmgren, as while an older prospect at 21 is also blessed with rim protecting talents with incredible movement skills for his size. Kamagate’s one flaw here is his decision-making, with the worst assist-to-turnover ratio of the group, though notably is performing at a very high level in a good professional league. Since he has taken sole command of his team’s frontcourt, Kamagate has been averaging 13 points, 7.5 rebounds, 0.7 assists to 2 turnovers, 1.6 blocks and 0.9 steals per game while shooting 66% from the field. With that it’s easy to have confidence in the 6’11’’ mobile big sticking in the NBA. Kamagate has great footwork and is incredibly mobile for his size and strength. In combination with plus wingspan and good footwork, Kamagate is able to corral in inaccurate passes and finish in traffic with ease. He needs to iron out some aspects of his game, such as not always utilizing his size in finishing and knowing when to dribble and when not, but the tools are there and screaming talent. Beyond his 76% shooting at the rim as a roll man, Kamagate has also flashed some midrange shooting ability at 9-13 over the season. Considering his rim gravity on offense and rim protection (opponents shoot under 50% at the rim against him) on defense, Kamagate looks like a first-round talent to me.

4. Trayce Jackson-Davis, Indiana

Jackson-Davis is a step down from the earlier three as not presenting the same upside, shorter at 6’9’’ and a little older as a 21-year-old junior. But he is a clear NBA-level lob threat, among the best max vertical leapers by my eye. Jackson-Davis does not have the same positional versatility as the three above, but knows his role and serves it excellently. Over his three NCAA seasons, Jackson-Davis has, sequentially, ranked 11th, 5th and 3rd in dunks among all high major players, as consistent of a roll threat as there is. His footwork is excellent and allows him to fit numbly through tight spaces which the bulkier roll threats cannot, the most reminiscent of John Collins of our Vertical Dominators. Jackson-Davis layers in capable short-roll passing, decisive and mistake-free with a good assist and low turnover rate. He blocks a ton of shots as well, a defender who welcomes physicality in the league, likely able to guard 4s or else serving as a small-ball 5.

5. Christian Koloko, Arizona

Koloko rounds out the group of guys I also wrote about as rim protectors, a hulking 7’1’’ with good wingspan. Koloko is as nimble as any seven-footer in this draft, yet again a preference of mine for vertical responsibilities than Mark Williams or Walker Kessler. Koloko’s patience in letting a play develop makes him a very functional pick-and-roll partner in combination with his size, not rushing his way to the rim and setting firm screens. While not as quick of a leaper, he is much more decisive about leaving his feet, a sign of reliability that would work on day one. Though older, his statistical profile is similar to Duren’s, improving on his passing as his assist rate has more than doubled from his prior season. While I don’t expect him to have the same upside as Duren, Holmgren or even Kamagate, he is a known commodity with some flashes of midrange shooting ability and a continued rate of improvement that suggests some potential to be a future starting center.

Prospects With a Chance to Contribute as Vertical Dominators:

Josh Minott, Memphis (Secondary Archetype: Body Bagger); Mark Williams, Duke; Khalifa Diop, Gran Canaria; Walker Kessler, Auburn

Minott was the toughest to pinpoint of any prospect through this exercise, with elements of each archetype shown despite limited playing time for Memphis as a freshman. But his best quality is easily his offensive rebounding, bolstered by an incredible sense of timing and quick leaping at 6’9’’. He is adept at snaking through traffic to get a hand on the ball off the rim, and has soft touch to guide it back to the hoop. He was not used as a roll man much in Memphis, but also projects as a decent passer with some high-end flashes shown in his limited attempts.

Mark Williams is a quick leaper for his 7’0’’ size with great accuracy when he aims for blocks or catching lobs. The issue is more that I don’t view him as having all the qualities of a connector, with iffy positioning, a tendency to lack physicality at times and poor passing: the combination of only 7% assist rate and 1% steal rate is a tough pill. But he should still be a good lob threat and shotblocker, and thus tough to keep off this list entirely.

Archetype #4: The 3&D Wing

NBA Examples: Mikal Bridges, Jae Crowder, Otto Porter Jr.

Core Competencies: Three Point Attempts, Three Point Percentage, Steals, Blocks

Baseline Requirements: A wingspan to seal off passing angles; a high and quick three-point shot release and willingness to shoot

Connects: Traditional guards and traditional bigs

Teams with Need: Philadelphia, Cleveland, Los Angeles Lakers

Summary: 3&D Wings provide a basic but consistent shooting threat to keep help defense tied to them, helping to open the lane for their teammates on offense. On the other side, these wings need to effectively siphon off portions of the court, either locking down a good wing scorer, blocking off passing lanes or both.

As always, functional passing and ballhandling are both useful layers to enhance these abilities, both allowing them to use the ball they’ve stolen in transition and to punish overly aggressive closeouts on offense.

Prospects With a Chance to Thrive as 3&D Wings:

1. Vince Williams Jr., VCU

VWJ is the prospect under this archetype whose combination of shooting and passing I trust the most to translate. Over his junior and senior season he has shot 40% on 272 threes and 80% on 184 free throws. He has a quick and high release in addition to good gathering technique to shoot off movement. Williams was a bit of a statistical anomaly this year, with no one else meeting his combination of three point volume and efficiency in combination with a 20% assist rate, 4% block and 3% steal rate. He was tailor-made for this archetype. The concerns for Vince come from his lack of elite lateral quickness, likely below average for an NBA wing. But his high feel for the game and quick processing make up for a lot of that, as shown by his stellar stock rates. The other concern is his handle grades more as mediocre than good, but a streamlined off-ball role would help with that, limiting his dribbling to decisive closeout attacking. Williams is the exact type of overworked mid-major player who could be scaled down into a hyper-efficient role. He would fit seamlessly next to established stars on a good team.

2.  Keegan Murray, Iowa

A finalist for the Wooden Award, Murray’s usage skyrocketed in his sophomore year with Luka Garza out of the picture, a challenge he excelled with. His off-ball usage dipped significantly, with less than one-fourth of his possessions coming in spot up and cuts compared to nearly half his freshman year. In exchange, he took on many more isos and post-ups, going from a combined 8% of his possessions to 25%. While his true shooting and assist rates both improved at staggering rates considering the tougher usage, his steal and block rates declined from exceptionally good to just pretty good for this archetype.

This offensive development has led to many mocking Murray in the mid- or even early-lotto, and, while I’m not ready to rule him out as a high-usage on-ball player, I do want to acknowledge his potential to fill in an ancillary role to a high level of competency. Murray ranked around the 85th %ile in spot up opportunities in both of his college seasons, and I have a high degree of faith in his shot working out in the NBA. In his smaller freshman-year role we saw him capable of difficult help defense rotations that he was not able to pull off to the same level as a sophomore with a higher usage. I believe in a reduced role a lot of that defensive effort would come back, as he has a great sense of timing to make up for an only mediocre wingspan (at least compared to elite 3&D wings). Keegan got a chance to show off improved handle his sophomore year as well, thriving as a driver, particularly to his left. Using Murray as an off-ball shooter and help defender in starting lineups, with then increased usage among bench lineups sounds like a good route to testing his efficacy in both roles as a young NBA player.

3. Gabriele Procida, Fortitudo Bologna

Procida, a full two years younger than Williams and Murray, provides a more limited fulfillment of this archetype but could thrive all the same. He has shot 40% from three on 132 attempts over his 18- and 19-year-old seasons in the top Italian league, primarily working off catch-and-shoot where he maintained an elite 1.5 points per possession. Beyond his shooting stroke, Procida is an excellent athlete, with a springy high release point impossible to block and also the leaping ability to finish with authoritative dunks when attacking the rim. While he is our worst passer of the bunch at a mere 6.4% assist rate (a better 7.8% the year before), his ability to contribute to a professional team at his young age suggests he meets a minimum threshold of awareness and adaptability. On defense, Procida may not always have perfect positioning but makes up for any missteps with constant activity, excellent at chasing shooters around screens and active hands to pick out any loose balls. His great front line speed make him a good closeout threat as well. With even a modest growth curve priced in, it is easy to imagine Procida providing some value to an NBA team in this role.

4. Jalen Slawson, Furman

Slawson was a statistical monster for the Paladins this season, in the 90th %ile or better for three point percentage, assist rate, defensive rebound rate and steal rate; 70th %ile or better for blocks, dunks, three point attempt rate and assist-to-turnover ratio. In short, there were a lot of connector archetypes I considered for the 22-year-old senior. I think he would be best suited, however, as a 3&D big wing due to both his quick and high shooting release from three as well as meeting the defensive thresholds most succinctly of anyone on this list. He envelops offensive players with his length and impeccable sense of timing. Slawson is a pure connector as often the center wheel of the Furman offense (which lost Noah Gurley to Alabama as a transfer), deliberate in his decision-making as showcased by his 24% assist rate and 1.5 assist-to-turnover ratio.

5. Tari Eason, LSU

Eason is in a similar spot as Keegan Murray as viewed by many as a potential on-ball creator in addition to off-ball. However, I have less faith in his handle and decision-making than Murray’s, a knock on his upside as a 3&D connector as well. Regardless, Eason’s shot improvements look real to me, shooting 36% from three on 78 attempts and 80% from the line on 188 attempts after 24%/57% on limited attempts as a freshman. He appears to have settled on a shot pocket with smoother energy transfer, so I’m inclined to buy the sophomore leap. On top of that, Tari is a great lateral athlete with a long wingspan, perfectly suited for our “siphon off a section of the court” requirement. He covers ground as well as anyone on the wing, nimble to pull off open-court steals that only NBA players can. The questions with Tari come from his more “connective” properties, as, while displaying some flashes of high processing on both ends, he is more often than not a little out of place or a little late on reads. Eason earns my ranking as a capable 3&D player who could become quite more if he continues to progress with his athletic tools and flashes of skill. His upside is the clear best wing defender in this class should it all click.

Prospects With a Chance to Contribute as 3&D Wing:

MarJon Beauchamp, G-League Ignite; Keon Ellis, Alabama; Jake Laravia, Wake Forest (Secondary Archetype: Body Bagger)

Beauchamp is a bit of a tweener as a connector, a great cutter and above average passer with good vertical athleticism. Where I ding him is his shooting percentages did not live up to his community college stats, at 27% from three over a small 66 attempt sample following 40% on 103 attempts at Yakima Valley CC. The form looks closer to okay then great to me, though he should be good enough to at least command soft close-outs. I have more faith in his defense, as he should be reliable on that end quickly if still lacking game-changing upside.

Ellis is unique in that I’d prefer him to guard 2s as often as 3s with his supreme quickness at 6’6’’, and with a reliable three point shot at 37% over 237 college attempts, could carve out a bench role in due time. The issues with Ellis are he is difficult to trust in the varied responsibilities that come with being a connector. While not asked to create much at Alabama, he still only barely exceeded 2 assists per game in his previous junior college years with a below 1 assist-to-turnover ratio.

Laravia was another tweener, used all over the court for Wake Forest in his junior year following a transfer from Indiana State in the Missouri Valley Conference. He could see a route as a Body Bagger with more strength, as his quickness will likely not be good enough to let sit on the wing in single coverage. But his shot looks good at 37% from three on 132 college attempts, and is a smart, functional passer.

Outside Chance but Still a Shot as 3&D Wing:

Justin Lewis, Marquette; Fabian White Jr., Houston; Kris Murray, Iowa

Archetype #5: The Maestro

NBA Examples: Tyrese Haliburton, Lonzo Ball, Desmond Bane, Monte Morris

Core Competencies: Assists, Assist-to-Turnovers, Steals, Three Point Attempts, Three Point Percentage

Baseline Requirements: 360-degree awareness and ability to pass into any brief windows. Permanent “decision-making nexus” from the perimeter

Connects: Traditional wings and traditional bigs

Teams with Need: Miami, Washington, New Orleans

Summary: The Maestro may not have total creation abilities like many star guards, but are lightning-quick decisionmakers, moving the ball at any angle with speed and accuracy. They should be quick to snag errant passes on defense and have a functional enough handle to patrol the perimeter, providing constant value even if not good or physical enough to attack the rim.

Prospects With a Chance to Contribute as a Maestro:

Ziga Samar, Fuenlabrada (Secondary Archetype: Physical Table Setter); Assemian Moulare, Boulogne-Levallois; Dalen Terry, Arizona (Secondary Archetypes: Physical Table Setter, 3&D Wing)