I’ve been waiting to release a 2024 NBA Draft Big Board, largely because this draft class remains so uncertain. The 2024 draft is seen as the most questionable one at the top in more than a decade. NBA teams are struggling to pinpoint the kind of prospect whose value is commensurate with that of a usual top-five pick.

Advertisement

Right now, I wouldn’t take any player in this class in the top four of the 2022 draft or the top five of the 2023 draft, and I still would not classify any with a Tier One or Tier Two grade. Because of that, the order these players will be selected remains extremely up in the air. It’s not an exaggeration to say any player (outside of one) ranked in the top nine of this board could end up going No. 1.

And yet, this class is also an incredibly fun one to break down. It’s an eye-of-the-beholder draft, and scouts are working hard to determine where value can be had. There are players not ranked on this board who will emerge over the course of the season and end up being drafted. This is just a snapshot of where we’re at a quarter of the way through the regular season — with myriad potential outcomes still on the board.

My goal right now is to identify guys I think have a good chance to play in the NBA for a reasonable amount of time. I’m thinking less in terms of upside, and more in terms of their chances of becoming strong rotation players. You’ll notice I placed an emphasis on prospects who really know how to play and have elite feel for the game. Another important factor I value, even more than in previous years, is each prospect’s ability to impact the game when they don’t have the ball. Because it’s difficult to pinpoint exactly which guys have potential to be on-ball creators, placing an emphasis on those who are effective without the ball seems like the best way to get value out of a class that evaluators believe lacks top-end talent.

This is a year when I somewhat regret not working for a team, since I would only be responsible for having to select a couple of players as opposed to having something of an opinion on 100.

A few other quick notes:

• Eleven of the top 33 players here are either playing for G League Ignite or overseas. This NCAA class is not particularly strong with NBA prospects right now.
• This does not look to be a good class of guards, outside of a couple guys I have near the top. Scouts are hoping players like Providence’s Garwey Dual, North Carolina’s Elliot Cadeau, Duke’s Jared McCain and Caleb Foster and others emerge further.
• Speaking of freshmen: At this stage of the process, as is true every year, I do not include freshmen that’d be ranked outside of the top 50. I’m extremely intrigued with all of those four players above, in addition to guys such as Aden Holloway (Auburn), Andrej Stojaković (Stanford), Jackson Shelstad (Oregon), Elmarko Jackson (Kansas), Jarin Stevenson (Alabama), Scotty Middleton (Ohio State), K.J. Lewis (Arizona), JoJo Tugler (Houston), Malik Mack (Harvard) and plenty others. But I will be more patient with them, given how little time they’ve logged at this level.

Finally, a few quick thoughts on how I build this thing. First, it does not take team fit into account. It goes without saying that the Boston Celtics’ board will look different from the Phoenix Suns’ board based on the schemes they run and the positions in which they need depth. I do give a bit of a bump to players who I think will be successful in multiple schemes. I also tend to give a bump to guys who seem to be winning players that can defend multiple positions, play well within a team defensive concept, knock down shots and play with great processing speed. The latter quality is the most important one for non-stars to have for NBA playoff success.

Advertisement

Second, I get input and information from NBA executives, college coaches, agents, scouts and other evaluators during the process of slotting players. Sometimes, those exchanges are about a prospect’s background and off-court habits. Sometimes, they’re about his work ethic. Other times, they’re just conversations about whether we think a guy can play or who they might compare to in the NBA. These conversations happen daily, but at the end of the day, this is my ranking. While it is reflective of the general tenor of NBA teams, it’s not a consensus board either.

Heights listed are according to school/team websites; ages are as of June 27, 2024.

Collier is the name most scouts and executives provide when I ask who they have at No. 1 right now. I think I agree with that assessment for now due to his upside, but I also want to see tangible growth throughout the season.

First though, the good. Collier’s intersection of quickness and strength allows him to play in the paint with ease. Once he gets to the rim, he’s able to not just absorb contact, but oftentimes rise up through it to finish with strength at the rim. He’s a power guard, typically attempting to go through defenders at the rim. It’d be wrong to call him an elite leaper, but he uses his strength and length well functionally. Yet it doesn’t (always) feel like he’s just bullying smaller players, because he can pass and make plays for his teammates even if they don’t always finish. In USC’s recent loss to Gonzaga, I counted 16 potential Collier assists, with the Trojans only converting six of them. Many of those looks were high-degree-of-difficulty kick-outs or dump-offs from a live dribble. Collier is averaging 17.3 points, 4.5 assists and 3.0 rebounds, making him one of the most productive freshmen in the country, and I expect the assist number to rise as USC hits conference play, as he’s been snake-bitten by teammates missing shots. On top of that, Collier’s jumper from distance has looked better this season, as he’s made 40 percent of his 3s to this point.

But there are significant concerns, both in how Collier is being used and in his own performance. Let’s start with the latter. Collier is a chronic over-penetrator, constantly so deep into the lane that he leaves himself no options when the defense collapses on him. That leads to a lot of wasted possessions, which is why he is averaging a robust 4.6 turnovers per game – a ludicrous number that will need to come down if he’s to justify going No. 1. His ball security has improved in the last two games, as he only turned the ball over five times combined against Eastern Washington and Gonzaga. But he desperately needs to improve his patience as a driver and be willing to hang out in the midrange for a beat longer.

USC is also contributing to the problem by running inverted actions that result in Collier posting up smaller guards, a bizarre structural decision that has not led to much success. USC does not typically have enough shooting to allow Collier to get the space he needs when drop-stepping or spinning to the rim. Because the Trojans consistently deploy two players opponents don’t worry about from the perimeter, there’s always help waiting at the basket. Andy Enfield gets a bad rap — he’s the winningest coach in USC history and has led them to seven 20-plus win seasons in the last eight years — but I can’t logically wrap my head around this offensive alignment.

Advertisement

Collier has not exhibited many issues getting to the rim this season, and I find his touch and comfort to be much better when he’s playing downhill and getting all the way to the basket. The Trojans’ offense looks better when he’s attacking in ball screens, even if turnovers have also been an issue for him there. Though I have Collier ranked No. 1 right now, I wouldn’t have had him in my top eight of last season’s draft class to this point. But as a lead creator who can pass, has some shooting potential and can consistently get into the paint, I think he represents the highest-upside player in the class as of this moment.

Reed Sheppard | 6-3 guard | freshman | Kentucky | No. 6

This is the eye-opener of the board. Sheppard has, in my opinion, clearly been the best freshman in college basketball thus far. In terms of deriving value for his team, I don’t think it’s all that close. So it was hard to rank him much lower than this.

Despite coming off the bench to start the season, Sheppard has been phenomenal every moment he’s been on the court. He is averaging 13.9 points, 3.8 assists, 4.2 rebounds, 1.1 blocks and 3.0 steals in 26 minutes per contest. Kentucky’s last two games are the first in which he’s cracked 30 minutes in each, and he averaged 23 points, seven rebounds and five assists while playing more consistently on the ball. More importantly, Kentucky is consistently a drastically better team with him on the floor, as his plus-minus jumps off the page every game.

Sheppard is such an appealing bet at this point because of his combination of elite shooting, plus skill and elite feel for the game. Sheppard is one of those players who seems to anticipate things before they happen, allowing him to make decisions faster than everyone. He nails hit-ahead passes to start critical transition opportunities and makes quick reversal passes to keep the defense in rotation. If you leave him open within 25 feet of the rim, the ball is going up, and it’s probably going in. If you go under one of his dribble handoffs, the ball is going up and through the rim.

So far, Sheppard has made 61 percent of his 4.5 3-point attempts per game. That rate won’t continue, but he’s definitely an elite shooter off the catch with the look of a 40-plus percent NBA 3-point shooter. Over the last two games, he’s showcased an ability to run Kentucky’s offense and play with the ball in his hands. Defensively, he’s always in passing lanes and makes timely rotations, with an impeccable sense of anticipation and unbelievable hand-eye coordination.

But the obvious questions here are real. Sheppard is listed at 6 foot 3, but doesn’t quite look that tall. He’s also not overly long. These measurements have led to defensive questions, both in terms of how his skills translate to the next level and his on-ball capabilities. UNC Wilmington actually hunted him a bit late in their upset win over Kentucky this past weekend. Athletically, Sheppard isn’t particularly shifty when trying to elude defenders and separate from his man on the ball. As a shooter, he’s been much more of a stand-still guy as opposed to a player flying off movement and creating his own opportunities. His set of skills isn’t perfect yet.

Sheppard is a polarizing player for scouts, and people in front offices are having trouble finding a point of comparison for his game. At the high end, stars like Stephen Curry and Trae Young have similar size, shooting and processing profiles, but Sheppard’s ballhandling is nowhere near their level. Tyrese Haliburton is bigger and has always been a better passer. Tyrese Maxey is way faster. Jalen Brunson has always possessed an elite level of craft and footwork that Sheppard hasn’t displayed quite yet. Moving outside of the All-Star group, Austin Reaves is bigger than Sheppard, while Desmond Bane is built like a truck. Sheppard is more skilled than a player like De’Anthony Melton, who racked up blocks and steals as a guard, and he’s a better shooter than Tyus Jones. But he isn’t as good defensively right now as someone like Alex Caruso, nor is he that much better offensively at this stage despite being more gifted with the ball in his hands. Luke Kennard has come up a few places, but Kennard didn’t produce defensively at Sheppard’s level, nor did he showcase as much on-ball ability. JJ Redick has also come up as a Sheppard comparison (he was a sneaky elite steals accumulator at Duke), but he played far more off the ball and was an elite shooter off movement. There isn’t really an NBA archetype for Sheppard right now.

Advertisement

Still, everything Sheppard does well is at a premium in today’s NBA. Only a few front-office executives have told me they are quite this high on Sheppard, but many more said they’d have a hard time seeing him picked outside the lottery. Others view him as more of a mid- or late-first-rounder.

With this draft’s upside as questionable as it is at the top, I’m more willing to bet on outliers like Sheppard breaking the mold. He’s been my favorite player in the country to watch so far in college hoops, and if we’re betting on guys with non-traditional pathways toward breakout stardom — think Haliburton, Maxey, Brunson and others — it makes sense to value those who possess elite feel and shooting ability as opposed to other athletic traits.

Ron Holland | 6-7 wing | 18 years old | G League Ignite | No. 8

Before diving into Holland, I want to set the scene of a fairly dire situation for the G League Ignite. The team is 1-8 and losing by an average of 19.3 points per game. The next-worst team in the G League has a differential of minus-14.4 per game, and the third-worst team has a minus-8.4 differential.

There are some reasons for the Ignite’s struggles. They haven’t been wildly healthy – Matas Buzelis just returned for his first G League game of the season over the weekend. The guards’ decision-making has been quite poor, and several have been in and out of the lineup outside of veteran John Jenkins, who has given a yeoman’s effort in attempting to lift this team’s offense. The less said about this group’s defense, the better. They are not well connected on that end and are horrendous in transition, something  worsened by offensive turnover issues that Holland has exacerbated, as we’ll explain below. The team’s 158-99 defeat to Salt Lake City was an aggressively difficult watch, as the Stars paraded to the rim in transition following 34 Ignite turnovers. (Yes, you read that correctly.).

There are significant positional and skill overlaps between all the prospects on the roster, as Holland, Buzelis, Tyler Smith, Izan Almansa, Thierry Darlan and Babacar Sane are  each best suited to play at either the three or four at this point in their young careers. Obviously, the Ignite’s success is measured by development, not wins and losses. But they have been exceptionally non-competitive to this point, and their roster overlap has made it difficult to evaluate their prospects. Last season’s team, led by Scoot Henderson, didn’t set the world on fire, but it at least went 15-35 with only a minus-7.4 point differential.

What scouts are trying to determine is simple: Are these players drastically worse than those who have previously played for the Ignite, or is the team’s roster construction and/or coaching dragging them down?

My read is that Holland’s play has been impacted by a combination of all of these factors. While we’ll later discuss a player who has stood out despite the Ignite’s issues, Holland has not. He’s averaging 17.8 points per game, but the buckets aren’t coming in ways conducive to high-level NBA offense. He does not look comfortable shooting from 3, having made just 20 percent of his 2.8 3-point attempts per game. He’s also only made 57.7 percent from the foul line. He gets a lot of points on leak-outs in transition, but the numbers aren’t pretty in half-court situations. Per Synergy, Holland has a 41.7 true shooting percentage in ball screens, a 39.5 true shooting percentage on spot-ups, a 41.8 true shooting percentage out of handoffs and a 47 true shooting percentage in isolation situations. To top it off, he’s not exactly a comfortable passer who makes high-level kick-outs where he’s reading the back line of the defense.

Advertisement

All of this pales in comparison to his biggest issue right now: turnovers. He has about a 1-to-2 assist-to-turnover ratio and gives the ball away 4.1 times per game, the third-most in the G League right now. Many of those errors come from him either getting stripped or making a late passing read. Holland is being asked to be one of the primary creators on the team, and he’s proving he’s not quite ready for it yet. So far, his shooting splits are a bit more efficient than Jonathan Kuminga’s Ignite season, but when you add in his turnover issues, Holland’s play is not that much better.

Holland is still ranked at No. 8 because he’s starting to come around. His last three games have been much better, as he went for 24 points, 32 points and 21 points in each with reasonable shooting splits. He’s displaying more comfort using his athleticism to attack the paint without turning the ball over. But those performances still represent a tiny sample within a small sample of games, and the issues he’s demonstrated were potential flags at the start of the season. Still, Holland is quite young, and things are improving. It’s worth holding relatively steady until we get a larger sample.

Tyler Smith | 6-11 forward | 19 years old | G League Ignite | No. 18

Smith has been the most impressive prospect for the Ignite through their first nine games. The former Overtime Elite participant has proven to be much more ready than expected for G League quality of competition, using his length, athleticism and shooting ability to impact games. He’s averaging 15 points, 4.7 rebounds and 2.0 assists while blocking a shot per game, while shooting 52 percent from the field and 45 percent from 3. He has a smooth, lefty jumper that he takes consistently off the hop or off a one-two step. He also has good instincts as a cutter to go with great hands, allowing him to catch and finish in one motion.

So why isn’t Smith starting? Honestly, I wonder if some of it is because he wasn’t the Ignite’s highest-profile player coming into the season. But it’s worth noting that his defense has been hit or miss. I don’t think his positioning is consistent yet, and he’s also stuck a bit in-between positions unless he measures out at a legitimate 6 foot 11. He can make impressive back-line rotations to protect the rim and contest shots, but he also misses rotations, too. It’s clear he’s still developing on that end.

Having said that, there are worse bets to make than Smith at a certain point in the draft. His size and athletic fluidity, combined with his ability to shoot, is an intriguing package. I’ve been a bit more impressed with his feel for the game compared to guys like Bobi Klintman and Trevon Brazile, both of whom could be competing against Smith for spots in the first round. Smith is the one success story of the Ignite’s season to this point.

Ajay Mitchell | 6-5 guard | 21 years old | UC Santa Barbara | No. 30

Mitchell is one of my favorite sleepers in this class. He’s a big, crafty guard with all sorts of touch and scoring ability who has been elite since he arrived at Santa Barbara from Belgium a few years ago. Last season’s Big West Player of the Year has been on the radar for a while now as an intriguing, creative small-school guard.

The name that often comes up when discussing Mitchell is Jalen Brunson. That’s not because people think Mitchell is as good as the former Villanova national player of the year, but rather because their games are stylistically similar. Like Brunson, Mitchell is a lefty who uses a bevy of change-of-pace moves mixed with shifty hips to find little creases in the defense. He’s not explosive, but he knows exactly how to separate from his man using a screen or a change of pace. He throws in shot-fakes and hesitations mixed with little inside-out moves and Euro steps, as well as quick between-the-legs dribbles to freeze defenders before driving by. On top of that, he’s constantly on-balance and does just about everything off two feet, allowing him to take best advantage of his touch. Last season, Mitchell hit an obscene 67.9 percent of his shots at the rim in half-court settings despite making zero dunks. He also drilled 46.3 percent of his floaters, per Synergy.

Advertisement

Mitchell has somehow played at an impossibly higher level in his first four games this season. He’s made 16 of his 19 shots at the rim so far. In his most recent two games, his first playing at least 30 minutes per as he returns from an early-season injury, he dropped 27 points against Fresno State and 30 on Northern Arizona. There has always been a question about Mitchell’s jumper from long distance, but the early returns this season look solid. He’s a career 80 percent free-throw shooter, which gives scouts hope that he can consistently improve his range as the lower half of his body gets stronger. Beyond that, he’s a solid passer – though not an elite one – who tends to avoid bad decisions.

Ultimately, scouts worry about how Mitchell will look against elite athletes, as they do with any player without a ton of explosiveness. Can he consistently separate from his man at the next level, or is he so crafty that he can make it work? Like many players in this class, evaluators are all over the map on him. He hasn’t received a ton of opportunities to showcase his skills against great teams. He only played one top-100 team in KenPom’s rankings last season, scoring 13 points on 12 shots against Baylor in the NCAA Tournament while dishing out four assists versus only one turnover. He wasn’t bad, but it wasn’t the kind of performance that immediately put him on the map. Mitchell plays a top-40 New Mexico team this week, followed by a game against a solid Loyola Marymount squad. Then he’ll get a pair of games in Big West play against a good UC Irvine team that has already beaten injury-riddled USC. Those are big games for Mitchell. If he performs in those while continuing his current pace, look for him to be a popular small-school sleeper in a season in which scouts are really searching for intriguing upside swings.

Other notes

Zaccharie Risacher is a player I’ve struggled with over the years. A player long on NBA teams’ radars, Risacher did not endear himself to evaluators at Hoop Summit last season, as he struggled to make an impact in practices. At this summer’s U19 World Cup, Risacher did not leave much of a mark on scouts who went over to see him play, averaging just seven points at the event while playing next to Melvin Ajinca, Zacharie Perrin and Alex Sarr. Fast forward six months, and Risacher has been fantastic to start the season in the French League while playing for JL Bourg after a move from ASVEL. Risacher is averaging 13.4 points per game in EuroCup competition while shooting 59 percent from the field and drilling everything from 3. I remain a bit skeptical that his nuclear 3-point shooting will hold up, but it’s clear he’s improved a jump shot that looked quite flat when I saw him in at Hoop Summit. The league is constantly looking out for guys with legitimate size, basketball IQ and skill, and Risacher certainly has those three things. Franz Wagner’s name has come up in a few conversations with some scouts, though I’m skeptical that Risacher has demonstrated the creation skills that Wagner showed in occasional flashes at Michigan. Risacher slides up to No. 4 as a wild card who has been incredibly productive at a high level.

I moved Justin Edwards down to No. 14 after a non-ideal start to the season. He hasn’t made shots at a high level yet and hasn’t quite made the impact one would hope from a top-five recruit. There’s a real conversation among NBA teams about whether Robert Dillingham and Sheppard are simply better prospects on Kentucky. Dillingham has looked tremendous so far outside of the UNC Wilmington game. He plays fast even by NBA standards, but unlike many guards who possess that type of speed, Dillingham also can shift gears and play with patience. After being much more of a scoring guard at lower levels, Dillingham has showcased much more of his passing vision. I moved Dillingham up to No. 15 after he was more of a watch-list guy coming into the season. Unsurprisingly, scouts have very polarized opinions of Dillingham; his extremely skinny frame makes many worried about his defensive role, and I’ve been pretty underwhelmed by his decision-making on that end. Still, his offensive repertoire is real enough to consider him far ahead of D.J. Wagner, whose inability to finish on the interior and shoot efficiently from the perimeter have raises causes for concern considering he’s much more of a scoring guard than a well-rounded point.

Oso Ighodaro has been one of my favorite college players for the last few years due to his incredible basketball IQ. His numbers this season don’t jump off the page, but he is an elite ball-screen partner for guards Tyler Kolek and Kam Jones. Ighodaro’s ability to create space and separation for his guards with quick flips out of dribble handoffs or timely re-screens and seals translate sublimely to an NBA in which bigs are often asked to play a lower usage role. He’s flashed a feathery floater from the 8-foot range, as well as a real ability to switch assignments and maintain sharp team defense. Don’t sleep on Kolek, either, as scouts who went to the Maui Invitational were impressed with his intelligence, mental makeup and leadership. Names like Payton Pritchard, Andrew Nembhard and Marcus Sasser come up when discussing him, all of whom were taken in the No. 25 to No. 31 range of the first round.

Virginia wing Ryan Dunn is running away with the National Defensive Player of the Year award at this early stage, dominating games with his length, anticipation, switchability and intelligence on that end. He rotates in a timely way and is constantly disruptive as a team defender. He’s slotted onto guards, bigs and wings in college hoops with minimal issue and is putting up historic block and steal numbers – 2.8 swats and 2.8 steals per game – on top of countless other deflections. His offense is a work in progress across the board, but scouts compare him favorably on defense to Herb Jones, an early second-round pick who would have gone in the lottery in a 2021 re-draft. I’ve moved Dunn up to No. 11 because of that, even if his jumper is going to need some real seasoning.

Tennessee wing Dalton Knecht has flashed as a big-time scorer, with his 37 points in Chapel Hill against North Carolina opening eyes in a big way after a standout Maui Invitational. Only high-major team (Marquette) has faced tougher defensive opposition this season than Tennessee, according to KenPom. Knecht has thrived despite that schedule, averaging 20 points, five rebounds and two assists per game while shooting 50 percent from the field, 40 percent from 3 and 82 percent from the line. The Vols run him off all sorts of movement and actions early in their sets to find him open shots, and they’ll occasionally use him as a mismatch post threat or allow him to lead the break. He’s a good vertical athlete at the rim and also has the ability to change his finishing angle on rim protectors in midair. Scouts are still trying to get a handle on just how big of a project he’ll be on defense, but his mentality and fearlessness at Maui and in Chapel Hill had scouts in attendance raving.

Advertisement

USC’s Kobe Johnson and Kansas’ Kevin McCullar are two defense-first prospects who have stood out early. Scouts remain mightily concerned about McCullar’s shooting, but his production has been undeniable, as he’s posted two triple-doubles while averaging 18 points, seven rebounds and five assists per game and maintaining the elite on-ball defense that has made him a potential draft pick in each of the last two seasons. Johnson has been less impressive statistically, but scouts are a bit more bullish on his offensive fit in the NBA because they believe he’ll be a better shooter and off-ball player. I’ve gotten a mix of answers when asked which of the two NBA personnel prefer, but I’ve ranked Johnson higher because I believe he’ll translate a bit better to a low-usage offensive role. Both look like legitimate NBA rotation players because of their defense in a draft in which it’s hard to find any degree of certainty on floor outcomes.

Two breakout freshmen to watch: Pittsburgh guard Bub Carrington and Iowa State wing Milan Momcilovic. Scouts are all over the map on Carrington as a potential one-and-done. Some see him as a potential lottery pick due to his shot-creation ability, comfort in ball screens and passing skill. He sees the court well and has been terrific as Pitt’s primary on-ball option. Others have noticed him struggle to score efficiently against high-major teams and worry about his inability to consistently get to the rim. Per Synergy,  Carrington has only nine half-court attempts at the rim in eight games, compared to 67 jump shots. It’s tough to live like that in the NBA. But he clearly has an immense amount of talent, so I split the difference and placed him in the 20s. Momcilovic is purely a bet on shooting skill, as he’s drilled 44 percent of his 47 attempts from 3 so far. At 6 foot 8, he has the ability to nail shots from distance off movement with a high release point, something NBA teams love to see from potential floor spacers. I want to see how he fares later in the season on defense before believing he’s a real one-and-done.

Two breakout transfer wings I’ve enjoyed: Jamir Watkins at Florida State and Jaylon Tyson at California. Tyson looked like he wouldn’t be eligible to play this season until the NCAA eventually came to its senses after he left Texas Tech. He has hit the ground running at Cal, averaging more than 20 points in the team’s first seven games under coach Mark Madsen. At 6 foot 7 with long arms and the ability to shoot, Tyson has long been on the radar of scouts, but he struggled to find his footing under Mark Adams and former Texas coach Chris Beard. Now, he looks comfortable and has started to reach the potential many expected. Watkins, on the other hand, is a bit of a surprise breakout. A transfer from VCU, he has stepped beautifully into a hybrid point-wing role for the Seminoles, averaging 13 points, six rebounds and four assists while playing the kind of terrific defense we saw at VCU. His jumper still isn’t falling, and ultimately, it must for his game to translate to the NBA. But these kind of “everything but the shot” wings tend to be popular developmental bets.

Finally, my favorite story in college basketball this season has been that of Tyon Grant-Foster at Grand Canyon. Originally a junior college player who developed into one of the country’s best players at that level in 2020, Grant-Foster committed to Kansas and played there for a year before transferring to DePaul. He played just one game there before a heart issue sidelined him for the rest of the season and the following one. He was told he would never play basketball again. However, after two years of rehab while graduating from DePaul, Grant-Foster received clearance to play again and hit the transfer portal, choosing Grand Canyon. He’s taken the opportunity and run with it in every way, averaging 23 points per game as a 6-foot-7 wing shot creator while showcasing the exact skill set that made him so highly sought after in 2020. He’ll turn 24 before the 2024 draft, but as long as NBA doctors clear him, he’s placed himself firmly on the pro radar. It’s an incredible comeback story that could have a storybook ending if he can reach the next level.

GO DEEPER

Men's college basketball power rankings: It's time to pay attention to Illinois

(Top photo of Isaiah Collier: Wally Skalij / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images)