With Current Lottery Rules, Trust Nets’ Pre-Draft Evaluations And Development

Brad Penner-Imagn Images

When some websites feel the need to post some filler content, they’ll turn to one of those “Re-Draft” columns. You know, the ones that look back at past NBA Drafts with the refrain from the song at the end of the film “Rushmore” in the background, “I wish that I knew what I know now…”

Of course, the do-overs never match the actual order of selections. That’s because Drafts are almost always crapshoots, reliant on evaluations of how teenagers will develop into men. Tricky business indeed.

Per HoopsHype.com, Caris LeVert should have gone 12^th instead of where the Nets got him at No. 20 in 2016 and Jarrett Allen fifth overall versus 22^nd a year later. That site didn’t do a 2021 re-draft, possibly because it’s too soon, but I’d bet Cam Thomas would have been given a lottery pick designation though in reality he dropped to Brookyln at No. 27. Hmm, it seems the art of identifying potential and the work involved in subsequent development kind of matter.

The Nets, who took back their lost 2025 first round pick from Houston via an offseason trade, will likely select from their highest Draft slot in 15 years, which has many fans stressing out over their 10 wins in their first 24 games. “The Nets are blowing the tank!” they cry. I’m here to calm everybody down.

Once in a while you’ll get an obviously transformational prospect in a Draft, but you’ll need the No. 1 overall pick for that. And the NBA minimized the ability of its clubs to tank their way to that slot five years ago with rule changes to its lottery system. Now the worst three teams each have the exact same odds to land picks 1-through-4, with the lottery winner holding a mere 14% chance. In fact, the team with the fewest wins has never won the lottery, selecting fifth as many times (twice) as they’ve picked second or third, since the change.

When it comes to the 2025 Draft, some are already placing Duke’s Cooper Flagg, who won’t even hit 18 until next week, in that stellar category. I get why Draft pundits are enthralled—his build and movements scream NBA ready—but it might be a bit premature to automatically throw him in with the LeBron’s of league history. We’re in an era where three-point shooting efficiency is becoming more of a prerequisite every year; Flagg is at 22% from behind the shorter collegiate arcs over his first ten games.

If someone like Flagg, who is perhaps the most hyped college freshman since fellow Dukie Zion Williamson (whose own NBA story hasn’t yet lived up to its billing), has some, um, flags like perimeter shooting and a handle that could use tightening, expect the rest of this supposedly loaded 2025 class to also enter the professional ranks as unfinished products.

While my viewership of college hoops is limited due to the general awfulness of the product, I have been watching several of the consensus top picks out of curiosity. Let’s just say that my socks are still on. From what I’ve gathered, I’d call Rutgers guard Dylan Harper a top two pick at this point—he has a bit of Jalen Brunson in him but with more size and a less consistent three-point stroke (33%).

After that, I see a lot of guessing. I watched Baylor’s VJ Edgecombe, a projected top-five pick, play against St. John’s and the announcers made it sound like he hadn’t hit a shot in a week (he supposedly was playing hurt, because apparently there’s no such thing as load/injury management in college ball). I saw BYU’s Egor Demin go 0-for-10 at Providence. And Harper’s Rutgers running mate Ace Bailey? He looks at times like he can be a great pro shotmaker, but he can also be invisible for five minutes without moving from the corner (which can happen when you play with a reluctant passer). And then you can count on his next touch going up at the basket no matter what—he has five assists total in 10 games.

Of the so-called top five above, only Flagg and Edgecombe have exhibited pro defensive form. Rutgers, which lost to Kennesaw State for heaven’s sake, often looks like a mess on that end, with Harper on skates and Bailey content to settle in the paint without offering up the rim protection or closeouts you’d expect from someone with his size and athleticism.

This post isn’t to pile dirt on kids playing their first semester at the NCAA level, but to highlight the dangers of being so sure about projections into the future. Nothing is really set in stone, other than you’ll need a whole lot of luck no matter where you finish in the NBA standings to get the one or two players who at this early stage look like they have the highest ceilings. If the Nets’ 2025 pick falls to six, seven or, heaven forbid, eight, the sun will still rise on Draft Day.

For the folks who argue that Brooklyn General Manager Sean Marks goofed by dealing four 1s including the original 2025 swap for the full rights to his old 2025 and 2026 picks if there was even a hint that they wouldn’t bottom out, let’s not rush to judgement on any of the players projected to go outside the top five. Besides, I’d argue that finding a Head Coach in Jordi Fernandez eclipses the dropping of a few Draft slots.

The Nets will eventually trade some or all of the veterans responsible for their relatively surprising start and plummet into the lowest depths, even if they remain above the most egregious tank teams. I get the historical pattern on the graph that corresponds All-Star selections with Draft slots, but that’s really irrelevant when looking at an individual year, especially with a class as deep as this one seems to be. To reiterate from a prior post, the picker matters as much as the pick, and if there’s one area of the job where Marks has earned the right to boast--assistants and scouts from prior Drafts may have left for higher offices, but Marks always pulled the trigger--it’s his Draft marksmanship (pun intended).

At least that’s according to people who compose the re-draft columns.