2025 NBA Draft

I don't think we will have a PF this year. I think our 5 positions will be labeled:

Point guard
Shooter
Shooter
Cooper
Center

It will be a 4-out Cooper led attack. IMO on defense Cooper can easily guard any ACC 3 or 4, so it will just depend on who's on the floor with him and the strengths/weaknesses of the opponents in terms of who Jon asks him to cover on D.
Just being a little pedantic here, but it is DBR… I think it’s less about who Cooper will match up with on D and more about how we setup the D to let Cooper do what he does best, and that is roam and make things happen. In Duke terms he’s like a longer, more athletic version of Battier rather than the second coming of Billy King as a one on one lockdown defender.
 
Here are some linkable, non-ESPN mock drafts one year in advance, with the ACC sampler.

Yahoo!/Krysten Peek (published June 27; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
9. Ian Jackson, UNC
13. Isaiah Evans, Duke
14. Donnie Freeman, Syracuse
15. Jalil Bethea, Miami
19. Khaman Maluach, Duke
22. Cade Tyson, UNC
24. Kon Knueppel, Duke
25. Jaland Lowe, Pittsburgh
29. Andrej Stojakovic, California

No NBA teams as fake destinations. Smart lady.

CBS/Adam Finkelstein and Travis Branham (June 27; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
5. Khaman Maluach, Duke
12. Jalil Bethea, Miami
14. Caleb Foster, Duke
16. Isaiah Evans, Duke
17. Elliot Cadeau, UNC
26. Hunter Sallis, Wake Forest
28. Ian Jackson, UNC
30. Kon Knueppel, Duke

This is the mock draft that crote linked above, but with all the ACC players. NBA teams are listed and completely irrelevant.

On3/James Fletcher III (June 28; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
7. Khaman Maluach, Duke
9. Jalil Bethea, Miami
14. Ian Jackson, UNC
16. Donnie Freeman, Syracuse
21. Isaiah Evans, Duke
23. Kon Knueppel, Duke
24. Drake Powell, UNC

A simple list. One year in advance, that's all you need.

SB Nation/Ricky O'Donnell (June 28; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
5. Khaman Maluach, Duke
10. Ian Jackson, UNC
12. Jalil Bethea, Miami
13. Donnie Freeman, Syracuse
19. Isaiah Evans, Duke
26. Drake Powell, UNC

It's in table format, with no column for NBA teams. Well done.

USA Today/Cydney Henderson and Jeff Zillgitt (June 28; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
9. Khaman Maluach, Duke
13. Jalil Bethea, Miami
14. Isaiah Evans, Duke
15. Ian Jackson, UNC
18. Drake Powell, UNC
20. Caleb Foster, Duke
27. Donnie Freeman, Syracuse

Again, a female author (co-author) and no NBA teams. Maybe women should take over the mock drafting industry?

CBS/Gary Parrish (June 29; lottery only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
3. Jalil Bethea, Miami
5. Khaman Maluach, Duke
10. Caleb Foster, Duke

He lists NBA teams, but says to ignore that and treat it like a big board. So why list NBA teams at all?
 
I don't think we will have a PF this year. I think our 5 positions will be labeled:

Point guard
Shooter
Shooter
Cooper
Center

It will be a 4-out Cooper led attack. IMO on defense Cooper can easily guard any ACC 3 or 4, so it will just depend on who's on the floor with him and the strengths/weaknesses of the opponents in terms of who Jon asks him to cover on D.
I love this because is sounds like a nightmare for other team's defense. Especially given our size 1-5. I think it could be very fun to watch.
 
I love this because is sounds like a nightmare for other team's defense. Especially given our size 1-5. I think it could be very fun to watch.
With Sky's position list and the projected draft, maybe Evans and K2 will get enough minutes to showcase their offense. If that's the case, what happens to the transfers minutes?

GoDuke!
 
Just being a little pedantic here, but it is DBR… I think it’s less about who Cooper will match up with on D and more about how we setup the D to let Cooper do what he does best, and that is roam and make things happen. In Duke terms he’s like a longer, more athletic version of Battier rather than the second coming of Billy King as a one on one lockdown defender.
Agree with this. If, for example, Flagg and Gillis are on the court together with both capable of guarding a 3 or 4, then Jon might choose to assign Gillis to the better 3 point shooter as a lockdown defender giving Cooper more freedom to help off his man and be a disrupter.

If this team were playing last year's team, then I think Gillis (or Kon or Sion) would be guarding Roach and Flagg be guarding Mitchell.
 
It
With Sky's position list and the projected draft, maybe Evans and K2 will get enough minutes to showcase their offense. If that's the case, what happens to the transfers minutes?

GoDuke!
Because I can't imagine Jon going 9-deep late in the season, it seems to me like the only way Evans and Kon could BOTH prove themselves as first round talents is if one of James or Gillis gets relegated to the deep bench. That's possible but seems unlikely.

I think what's more likely is that one of Kon or Evans is in the 8 man rotation and the other hopefully returns to star as a sophomore. My money is on Kon to be that breakout star this year after seeing him in that scrimmage video, but maybe it ends up being Evans with that unguardable high-release jump shot.

Or if one of Gillis or Sion ends up on the deep bench, I would guess Gillis. Disappointing for him but it would mean the freshmen are crushing it.
 
Then again...... maybe this finally is the year that Jon spreads the 120 minutes at the 1-3 pretty evenly across the six guys - Proctor, Foster, James, Gillis, Evans, Kon. That's nice round math at 20mpg each. Keep the dream alive!
 
Duke had, what?, seven players transfer last year. IMHO (where H means Hubris) Jon will not be sitting NBA-level talent this year. The easiest way out of having a crunch of qualified players on the roster is to give more meaningful PT -- 8+ mins., 10+ mins. per game -- to more playerd. Never happened before, you say? Well, with respect to player movement, this is a new world, where players have no patience for bench time.
 
Duke had, what?, seven players transfer last year. IMHO (where H means Hubris) Jon will not be sitting NBA-level talent this year. The easiest way out of having a crunch of qualified players on the roster is to give more meaningful PT -- 8+ mins., 10+ mins. per game -- to more playerd. Never happened before, you say? Well, with respect to player movement, this is a new world, where players have no patience for bench time.
I'd agree with you sage. But with the caveat that if Jon believes playing Gillis or Sion over Evans or Kon strengthens our shot at a championship, then I think he plays the vets.

I'm in the camp that believes both Stewart and Power would be back this year if Gillis and Brown weren't brought in. So I think we still have a great shot of bringing back any of these freshmen who may fall outside of the rotation - Evans, Kon, Ngongba, Harris - if Jon doesn't bring in OAD or talented transfers in "ahead of them" at their positions.

Let's say Ngongba doesn't play a ton this year, but he's looking at 20-25mpg next year sharing the 80 front court minutes with Brown and a hotshot OAD PF like Boozer. Would he return? I would think it's likely. Similar scenarios with the other 3.
 
Here are some linkable, non-ESPN mock drafts one year in advance, with the ACC sampler.

Yahoo!/Krysten Peek (published June 27; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
9. Ian Jackson, UNC
13. Isaiah Evans, Duke
14. Donnie Freeman, Syracuse
15. Jalil Bethea, Miami
19. Khaman Maluach, Duke
22. Cade Tyson, UNC
24. Kon Knueppel, Duke
25. Jaland Lowe, Pittsburgh
29. Andrej Stojakovic, California

No NBA teams as fake destinations. Smart lady.

CBS/Adam Finkelstein and Travis Branham (June 27; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
5. Khaman Maluach, Duke
12. Jalil Bethea, Miami
14. Caleb Foster, Duke
16. Isaiah Evans, Duke
17. Elliot Cadeau, UNC
26. Hunter Sallis, Wake Forest
28. Ian Jackson, UNC
30. Kon Knueppel, Duke

This is the mock draft that crote linked above, but with all the ACC players. NBA teams are listed and completely irrelevant.

On3/James Fletcher III (June 28; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
7. Khaman Maluach, Duke
9. Jalil Bethea, Miami
14. Ian Jackson, UNC
16. Donnie Freeman, Syracuse
21. Isaiah Evans, Duke
23. Kon Knueppel, Duke
24. Drake Powell, UNC

A simple list. One year in advance, that's all you need.

SB Nation/Ricky O'Donnell (June 28; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
5. Khaman Maluach, Duke
10. Ian Jackson, UNC
12. Jalil Bethea, Miami
13. Donnie Freeman, Syracuse
19. Isaiah Evans, Duke
26. Drake Powell, UNC

It's in table format, with no column for NBA teams. Well done.

USA Today/Cydney Henderson and Jeff Zillgitt (June 28; first round only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
9. Khaman Maluach, Duke
13. Jalil Bethea, Miami
14. Isaiah Evans, Duke
15. Ian Jackson, UNC
18. Drake Powell, UNC
20. Caleb Foster, Duke
27. Donnie Freeman, Syracuse

Again, a female author (co-author) and no NBA teams. Maybe women should take over the mock drafting industry?

CBS/Gary Parrish (June 29; lottery only)

1. Cooper Flagg, Duke
3. Jalil Bethea, Miami
5. Khaman Maluach, Duke
10. Caleb Foster, Duke

He lists NBA teams, but says to ignore that and treat it like a big board. So why list NBA teams at all?
Hopefully these mocks will be providing some serious fire to Tyrese Proctor.
 
I'd agree with you sage. But with the caveat that if Jon believes playing Gillis or Sion over Evans or Kon strengthens our shot at a championship, then I think he plays the vets.

I'm in the camp that believes both Stewart and Power would be back this year if Gillis and Brown weren't brought in. So I think we still have a great shot of bringing back any of these freshmen who may fall outside of the rotation - Evans, Kon, Ngongba, Harris - if Jon doesn't bring in OAD or talented transfers in "ahead of them" at their positions.

Let's say Ngongba doesn't play a ton this year, but he's looking at 20-25mpg next year sharing the 80 front court minutes with Brown and a hotshot OAD PF like Boozer. Would he return? I would think it's likely. Similar scenarios with the other 3.
I hope you are sitting down Sky because I agree with your first paragraph.

And now back to our regularly scheduled disagreements with paragraphs 2 and 3. What you write could happen, but I think it is far, far, far from a sure thing. For all these players, playing in college is an intermediate goal. If they get buried on the bench in year 1 like TJ and Sean did, I think the most likely outcome is a transfer regardless of the possibility of minutes in year 2.

Your Pat example is missing a few elements. Jon is not going to go into a season with Pat, Maliq, and OAD PF as the only frontcourt players. There will be at least one more quality player in the mix, and more likely two. Pat would have just spent a season buried on the bench, and behind Maliq on the depth chart. Pat is going to start year 2 behind Maliq and OAD, and competing with one or two other quality bigs for third place in a big man rotation. That is a big ask when Pat will have less encumbered opportunities elsewhere.
 
This season's corollary to the "every thread becomes a minutes thread" is apparently "every thread becomes a 'will Cooper play the "4"/how do we define positions in our rotation' thread"
 
I'm in the camp that believes both Stewart and Power would be back this year if Gillis and Brown weren't brought in. So I think we still have a great shot of bringing back any of these freshmen who may fall outside of the rotation - Evans, Kon, Ngongba, Harris - if Jon doesn't bring in OAD or talented transfers in "ahead of them" at their positions.

Let's say Ngongba doesn't play a ton this year, but he's looking at 20-25mpg next year sharing the 80 front court minutes with Brown and a hotshot OAD PF like Boozer. Would he return? I would think it's likely. Similar scenarios with the other 3.

For all these players, playing in college is an intermediate goal. If they get buried on the bench in year 1 like TJ and Sean did, I think the most likely outcome is a transfer regardless of the possibility of minutes in year 2.

Jon is not going to go into a season with Pat, Maliq, and OAD PF as the only frontcourt players. There will be at least one more quality player in the mix, and more likely two. Pat would have just spent a season buried on the bench, and behind Maliq on the depth chart. Pat is going to start year 2 behind Maliq and OAD, and competing with one or two other quality bigs for third place in a big man rotation. That is a big ask when Pat will have less encumbered opportunities elsewhere.

If the recent years become the norm, it looks like Duke tries to build their roster using:
  • Returnees
  • OAD
  • Recruits in the 10-50 range
  • Transfers in the 50-100 range
We build around a core of returnees and OAD, with next tier recruits and transfers battling it out for minutes and pushing the core if they don't improve and measure up.

I don't see why we wouldn't continue to bring in high floor transfers every year, who maybe had a low usage rate at their previous school but show the potential for more. If the freshmen recruits can't beat them out for minutes, well, then, they weren't ready. And if you aren't ready as a freshman, it is going to be an open question for both the coaches and the player if they will be ready in year 2.

To be blunt about it, if you have a roster that is based on competition, there are going to be winners and losers every year. And it's not unreasonable for a player that loses to consider if they should give it a try elsewhere.

I know there is great angst about players transferring out, but competition will either force players to get better, or show that they are not really at this level.
 
If the recent years become the norm, it looks like Duke tries to build their roster using:
  • Returnees
  • OAD
  • Recruits in the 10-50 range
  • Transfers in the 50-100 range
We build around a core of returnees and OAD, with next tier recruits and transfers battling it out for minutes and pushing the core if they don't improve and measure up.

I don't see why we wouldn't continue to bring in high floor transfers every year, who maybe had a low usage rate at their previous school but show the potential for more. If the freshmen recruits can't beat them out for minutes, well, then, they weren't ready. And if you aren't ready as a freshman, it is going to be an open question for both the coaches and the player if they will be ready in year 2.

To be blunt about it, if you have a roster that is based on competition, there are going to be winners and losers every year. And it's not unreasonable for a player that loses to consider if they should give it a try elsewhere.

I know there is great angst about players transferring out, but competition will either force players to get better, or show that they are not really at this level.
What surprised me during this past transfer-fest was the lack of "down transfers." I am guessing, but I would imagine that many expected Jaden, Jaylen, and Christian to go the mid-major route. Where they ended up shows that others thought that they along with Sean and TJ could compete at this level.
 
What surprised me during this past transfer-fest was the lack of "down transfers." I am guessing, but I would imagine that many expected Jaden, Jaylen, and Christian to go the mid-major route. Where they ended up shows that others thought that they along with Sean and TJ could compete at this level.
I kind of read it the other way. It indicates that UVA, Clemson, Ohio State, etc., ARE enough of a down transfer from Duke that people who can't get playing time here can get playing time there. And that Duke can now cherry pick from a Syracuse and a Purdue, which makes me think we'll have cherry pie every year, because, well, pie.
 
If the recent years become the norm, it looks like Duke tries to build their roster using:
  • Returnees
  • OAD
  • Recruits in the 10-50 range
  • Transfers in the 50-100 range
We build around a core of returnees and OAD, with next tier recruits and transfers battling it out for minutes and pushing the core if they don't improve and measure up.

I don't see why we wouldn't continue to bring in high floor transfers every year, who maybe had a low usage rate at their previous school but show the potential for more. If the freshmen recruits can't beat them out for minutes, well, then, they weren't ready. And if you aren't ready as a freshman, it is going to be an open question for both the coaches and the player if they will be ready in year 2.

To be blunt about it, if you have a roster that is based on competition, there are going to be winners and losers every year. And it's not unreasonable for a player that loses to consider if they should give it a try elsewhere.

I know there is great angst about players transferring out, but competition will either force players to get better, or show that they are not really at this level.
I feel like coaching staffs are escaping some of the blame for transfer angst, and I'm not sure why.

At McKinsey and then consulting the past few years, directly or through friends I've gotten to know many impressive brands. I think folks would be surprised at the level of dysfunction w/in a majority of these brands. Middle and senior management are especially unimpressive.

Given that, I don't see any reason to think that the "management" at schools like Duke are infallible, and I suspect a good many could be doing things much better, and more than a handful are laughably incompetent (looking at you, John Calipari).

I think we give the staff too much credit to say it is solely the player's responsibility to get a satisfactory number of minutes, and that if they leave, well, they weren't ready. I would wager a wagon full of pies that if McKinsey came in (or heck, I"ll do it for season tickets), they would analyze recruiting and player management and come up with a significantly better approach to recruiting, playing, and retaining players in a way that would increase wins and lower angst.
 
I feel like coaching staffs are escaping some of the blame for transfer angst, and I'm not sure why.

At McKinsey and then consulting the past few years, directly or through friends I've gotten to know many impressive brands. I think folks would be surprised at the level of dysfunction w/in a majority of these brands. Middle and senior management are especially unimpressive.

Given that, I don't see any reason to think that the "management" at schools like Duke are infallible, and I suspect a good many could be doing things much better, and more than a handful are laughably incompetent (looking at you, John Calipari).

I think we give the staff too much credit to say it is solely the player's responsibility to get a satisfactory number of minutes, and that if they leave, well, they weren't ready. I would wager a wagon full of pies that if McKinsey came in (or heck, I"ll do it for season tickets), they would analyze recruiting and player management and come up with a significantly better approach to recruiting, playing, and retaining players in a way that would increase wins and lower angst.
No offense (sorry, I hate that phrase but it applies here), but we have discussed this here before and if McKinsey came in, they would likely make it a lot worse. And this comes from someone who has several very close friends from business school who worked there (and after a few drinks they would admit the same thing). I spend a good portion of most days digging out of a project that McKinsey completely botched - I was cursing them for about 30 minutes this morning. Obviously McKinsey has done plenty of good work to justify their reputation, but there is a lot of garbage mixed in there. But we can have that discussion in another venue as I'm guessing most people here don't care, so my apologies.

There is no silver bullet to recruiting, particularly for basketball. Particularly because the rules keep changing, the number of players on a team is so small that one or two minor mistakes could really change things, as could one or two big wins. And you are dealing with the whims of teenagers, lots of money, and many unscrupulous characters attached to the players. And the supporters of the team (students, faculty, alums, etc.) have a very diverse set of priorities and demands and it is impossible to make them all happy.

So how about that 2025 NBA draft?
 
Of course there are things that Duke and all basketball programs could do better, but McKinsey would be well down my list of groups to take advice from! It's a lot easier to critique a basketball program than to actually run one. Coach K and now Jon have generally done an excellent job.

Bringing in outside perspectives and voices like Rachel Baker and Mike Schlage and Jai Lucas are indicators of a program that is continually evolving and striving to do better. I imagine Jon is getting lots of advice from lots of smart people, but at the end of the day he's got to trust his judgement.
 
No offense (sorry, I hate that phrase but it applies here), but we have discussed this here before and if McKinsey came in, they would likely make it a lot worse. And this comes from someone who has several very close friends from business school who worked there (and after a few drinks they would admit the same thing). I spend a good portion of most days digging out of a project that McKinsey completely botched - I was cursing them for about 30 minutes this morning. Obviously McKinsey has done plenty of good work to justify their reputation, but there is a lot of garbage mixed in there. But we can have that discussion in another venue as I'm guessing most people here don't care, so my apologies.

There is no silver bullet to recruiting, particularly for basketball. Particularly because the rules keep changing, the number of players on a team is so small that one or two minor mistakes could really change things, as could one or two big wins. And you are dealing with the whims of teenagers, lots of money, and many unscrupulous characters attached to the players. And the supporters of the team (students, faculty, alums, etc.) have a very diverse set of priorities and demands and it is impossible to make them all happy.

So how about that 2025 NBA draft?
I would picture a management consultant as saying "Get rid of your poorer performing players, and bring in the best talent you can within your budget. Wherever you can find a better talent at a lesser price, do it."

I don't see that as fitting with the goals this board/thread is espousing.
 
I would picture a management consultant as saying "Get rid of your poorer performing players, and bring in the best talent you can within your budget. Wherever you can find a better talent at a lesser price, do it."

I don't see that as fitting with the goals this board/thread is espousing.
"Get rid of your poorer performing players (Stewart, Power, Reeves, even Mitchell), and bring in the best talent you can within your budget (Flagg, Maluach, Evans, K2, Harris, Big Pat). Wherever you can find a better talent at a lesser price, do it. (Gillis, Brown, James.)
 
Back
Top