2025 NBA Draft Grades: Winners, Losers for All 30 Teams

My evaluations of each team`s performance in the 2025 NBA Draft, which concluded Thursday evening, stand apart because they don`t focus on future results. The actual outcomes will be determined by factors beyond a team`s influence – or even a player`s, particularly health – long after the selections are made. No single draft class, not even one as large as the Brooklyn Nets` five first-rounders, provides enough data points for results to stabilize quickly.

Therefore, my assessment focuses on the value and fit of each pick based on the information known at the time of the draft. I heavily utilize my proprietary statistical projections for prospects, alongside insights from ESPN`s Jonathan Givony and Jeremy Woo. Draft trades are also factored into the grades. Typically, teams surrender too much value to move up, confident they can spot talent better than their rivals. The trade made by the New Orleans Pelicans this year, jumping from pick 23 to 13, appears especially hazardous, even by those standards. Unsurprisingly, the Pelicans received the lowest grade, while the Atlanta Hawks, beneficiaries of that trade, share the top spot.

Let`s run through my grades for every team.

Atlanta Hawks: A

Round 1: Asa Newell (No. 23)

It almost didn`t matter whom the Hawks selected after securing an unprotected 2026 first-round pick – the better of those owned by Milwaukee and New Orleans – by trading down 10 spots with the Pelicans. I might have made that trade just for the pick swap alone, without getting the 23rd pick. It`s even better that Atlanta picked a prospect ranked 13th in my projections.

Time will reveal if Newell integrates into the rotation fast enough to complement newly acquired Kristaps Porzingis, but I admire the potential synergy as Porzingis`s strengths ideally compensate for the weaknesses that make Newell a forward/center tweener.

---

Boston Celtics: C+

Round 1: Hugo Gonzalez (No. 28)
Round 2: Amari Williams (No. 46), Max Shulga (No. 57)

Gonzalez would have been a more sensible pick for Boston as a stash player, allowing him further development overseas before joining the NBA. Instead, Brad Stevens indicated the Celtics intend to bring him over next season.

Comparisons were made on the broadcast between Gonzalez and Denver Nuggets wing Christian Braun. A significant difference lies in shooting: Braun, despite not being known primarily as a shooter, made 38% of his three-pointers in college, whereas Gonzalez shot 27% at Real Madrid.

Williams presents an intriguing profile, showcasing multiple strengths as a rebounder, rim protector, and facilitator from the elbow. However, his career field goal percentage on two-pointers was only 54%, which is quite low for a center who doesn`t stretch the floor. Shulga, Boston`s final pick, rated highest in my model due to his career 39% three-point shooting efficiency.

---

Brooklyn Nets: C+

Round 1: Egor Demin (No. 8), Nolan Traore (No. 19), Drake Powell (No. 22), Ben Saraf (No. 26), Danny Wolf (No. 27)

The Nets` unprecedented volume of first-round selections is perhaps more significant from a strategic perspective than the individual picks themselves, which is one reason I highly rated the trades used to acquire them.

Brooklyn is making a considerable bet on developing a remarkable number of young players, many possessing similar skill sets. Demin and Traore, for instance, share many characteristics: strong playmakers with good size, but needing improvement in shooting and scoring efficiency. They can coexist defensively, but floor spacing could be challenging with certain lineups.

Drafting so many raw prospects should aid the Nets` efforts to secure another lottery pick in 2026, their last year controlling their own first-round selection before it goes to the Houston Rockets in 2027.

---

Charlotte Hornets: B

Round 1: Kon Knueppel (No. 4), Liam McNeeley (No. 29)
Round 2: Sion James (No. 33), Ryan Kalkbrenner (No. 34)

While jokes about the Hornets` preference for drafting players from the Research Triangle may abound, Knueppel ranked second in my projections and perfectly addresses Charlotte`s need at shooting guard.

Although the same could be said for Tre Johnson, Knueppel was a significantly more efficient scorer at Duke and performed better in my metrics than Johnson, despite Johnson having a larger on-ball role in the Nike EYBL circuit.

Selecting McNeeley, who fits a similar mold, was likely a best-player-available decision after he fell below his projected range in the early twenties. I`m less enthusiastic about the Hornets taking James, another Duke player, high in the second round. Primarily a role player over five college seasons, James never posted a usage rate exceeding 17.1%.

Following Charlotte`s trade of starting center Mark Williams, there might be an immediate opportunity for Kalkbrenner to contribute if his pick-and-roll defense is NBA-ready.

---

Chicago Bulls: A-

Round 1: Noa Essengue (No. 12)
Round 2: Lachlan Olbrich (No. 55)

I`m curious to see how Essengue will fit alongside 2024 lottery pick Matas Buzelis, another young combo forward. If they develop sufficient shooting to play together at forward or if Buzelis gains enough strength to occasionally play center, their combined length and athleticism could be a significant asset for Chicago.

Credit is due to the Bulls for selecting the best player available and continuing to draft young prospects, despite their reluctance to fully bottom out and secure higher lottery picks.

---

Cleveland Cavaliers: B

Round 2: Tyrese Proctor (No. 49), Saliou Niang (No. 58)

The Cavaliers didn`t pick until well into the second night of the draft but landed an intriguing prospect in Proctor, who continued to develop following his initial one-and-done hype. Proctor shot 40.5% from three last season and shows promise as an on-ball defender, although his steal rate could improve. Niang, chosen as a stash player, faces longer odds due to his shooting: 26% career from three and 71% from the free-throw line.

---

Dallas Mavericks: B

Round 1: Cooper Flagg (No. 1)

How extensive do you imagine the debate was in the Mavericks` front office regarding this pick? From the moment Dallas` lottery combination unexpectedly secured the first overall pick, it was widely assumed Flagg would be the selection, and rightly so.

From a process standpoint, the Mavericks don`t earn praise for winning the lottery, only for not mishandling the top selection.

---

Denver Nuggets: Incomplete

Expect to see the Nuggets frequently graded as `incomplete.` They did not control any future second-round picks before the draft concluded (other than getting their own 2032 second-rounder back) and still owe a couple of protected first-round picks, starting in 2027.

---

Detroit Pistons: B

Round 2: Chaz Lanier (No. 37)

Similar to fellow former Tennessee standout Dalton Knecht, Lanier blossomed late, elevating his scoring from 4.7 points at North Florida in 2022-23 to an average of 18 points in the SEC last season. He`s an excellent shooter (40% career from three) with good size, providing the Pistons with potential depth if they are unable to re-sign free agents Malik Beasley and Tim Hardaway Jr.

---

Golden State Warriors: B

Round 2: Alex Toohey (No. 52), Will Richard (No. 56)

Toohey`s shooting remains a work in progress after he converted 31% in the Australian NBL last season, but his defensive engagement was notable in his steal and block rates. I`ve long favored Richard, who ranked in the top 30 of my projections, particularly for his high two-point field goal percentage.

---

Houston Rockets: Incomplete

The Rockets utilized both of their 2025 draft picks to acquire Kevin Durant in a trade that cannot be finalized until July 6. As a result, they should be considered winners despite their historically strong performance in the draft.

---

Indiana Pacers: A

Round 2: Kam Jones (No. 38), Taelon Peter (No. 54)

For the second consecutive year, the Pacers have made one of my favorite second-round selections. Unlike 2024 second-rounder Johnny Furphy, who played sparingly as a 20-year-old rookie, the 23-year-old Jones possesses greater potential for immediate impact. Indiana could certainly benefit from guard depth, especially with Tyrese Haliburton sidelined after his Achilles injury in Game 7 of the NBA Finals.

Peter, who spent most of his college career at Division II Arkansas Tech, represents an intriguing risk. He`s a guard who averaged only 1.0 assist as a fifth-year senior at Liberty, but why pass when you shoot 76% on two-pointers and 45% on three-pointers? Whether that translates to the NBA remains to be seen, but at pick No. 54, there`s essentially no downside for Indiana.

---

LA Clippers: C-

Round 1: Yanic Konan Niederhauser (No. 30)
Round 2: Kobe Sanders (No. 50)

As a second-round pick, I could potentially justify the value of the late-blooming Niederhauser, an exceptional shot blocker who developed into a scoring threat after transferring to Penn State.

However, drafting him in the first round is harder to defend, considering Niederhauser is a below-average defensive rebounder and had more than twice as many assists as turnovers. His overall profile bears similarity to Daniel Oturu, whom the Clippers drafted 33rd in 2020.

Sanders also experienced a late bloom, not reaching double-digit scoring average until his fourth college season. My projections place more emphasis on performance in earlier college seasons, as early standout play has historically been a stronger predictor of NBA success.

---

Los Angeles Lakers: B+

Round 2: Adou Thiero (No. 36)

Kudos to the Lakers for using cash to move up from pick 55 to 36 after completing a couple of trades. Thiero`s steal and block rates suggest defensive potential, assuming he can make enough outside shots to stay on the court. Thiero was a career 28% three-point shooter in college.

---

Memphis Grizzlies: C-

Round 1: Cedric Coward (No. 11)
Round 2: Javon Small (No. 48), Jahmai Mashack (No. 59)

It wouldn`t truly feel like a Grizzlies draft without a trade up, marking their fourth in the first round since 2019. Moving up two spots for Brandon Clarke proved successful, but sacrificing greater value to acquire Jake LaRavia and Ziaire Williams did not.

In this instance, Memphis sent one of the unprotected Orlando first-round picks acquired in the Desmond Bane trade to move up five spots, which offers questionable value at best. This isn`t an indictment of Coward, who ranked 13th in the stats-only version of my projections. However, I would have preferred waiting to see if either Coward or Carter Bryant (No. 14) were still available before executing the trade up.

I liked the value Memphis got with Small, who is, fittingly, undersized but scored efficiently given his 28% usage rate as a senior at West Virginia. Mashack, whose scoring topped out at 6.0 PPG as a senior at Tennessee, would have fit the “Grit `n` Grind” era Grizzlies with his active defense.

---

Miami Heat: A-

Round 1: Kasparas Jakucionis (No. 20)

Jakucionis is not without flaws as a prospect. His steal and block rates are concerningly low, and he also struggled with turnovers in his single season at Illinois.

However, this selection still feels like an overcorrection for a player frequently ranked within the top 10 throughout the year. Miami capitalized on this drop, securing one of the draft`s better value picks.

---

Milwaukee Bucks: B

Round 2: Bogoljub Markovic (No. 47)

No prospect the Bucks could have drafted at pick 47 was likely to alter Giannis Antetokounmpo`s future with Milwaukee. Markovic scored efficiently in his first full season in the Adriatic League, shooting 61% on two-pointers and 37% on three-pointers, although low steal and block rates raise defensive questions.

---

Minnesota Timberwolves: B-

Round 1: Joan Beringer (No. 17)
Round 2: Rocco Zikarsky (No. 45)

The Timberwolves have a clear vision for how Beringer, a low-usage center who excelled as a rim protector in Slovenia, will fit their system. Expecting Beringer to become another Rudy Gobert, a premier finisher with a wingspan measured four inches longer at the NBA draft combine, is unrealistic.

Nevertheless, as Gobert ages, Minnesota will require a successor, and Beringer possesses the potential to eventually fill that role.

In the second round, the Timberwolves reinforced this strategy by selecting the 7-foot-3 Zikarsky. Both players show remarkably similar projections, and observing how Minnesota manages their development simultaneously will be interesting.

---

New Orleans Pelicans: F

Round 1: Jeremiah Fears (No. 7), Derik Queen (No. 13)
Round 2: Micah Peavy (No. 40)

It is conceivable that a trade like the one the Pelicans made to draft Queen at pick 13 could succeed. The Phoenix Suns, for example, gave up an unprotected future first-rounder in 2018 to move up six spots and never regretted drafting Mikal Bridges.

Still, New Orleans is placing a substantial bet on their evaluation that Queen is less valuable than Fears yet still worth trading up for. The risk is amplified because the Pelicans` own 2026 pick is potentially involved in the deal. At least Bridges was a prospect who rated sixth overall in my projections; Queen was outside the top 30.

I appreciated New Orleans` decision not to feel compelled to take Fears at pick 7, where he was widely considered the best available prospect. However, with the benefit of hindsight, the Pelicans would have been better off drafting Queen with their original pick rather than ending up with both prospects after the trade.

Peavy had a breakout season as a fifth-year senior at Georgetown, averaging 17.2 points and 2.3 steals. His leap to 40% three-point shooting provides Peavy with a chance at a 3-and-D role, although he didn`t show the same improvement at the free-throw line (66%).

---

New York Knicks: C+

Round 2: Mohamed Diawara (No. 51)

Diawara hasn`t emerged as an impact player in his native France, averaging just 5.8 points for Cholet last season. Stashing Diawara overseas for further development might be a more sensible approach than having him occupy a roster spot immediately.

---

Oklahoma City Thunder: B

Round 1: Thomas Sorber (No. 15)
Round 2: Brooks Barnhizer (No. 44)

As with Beringer for Minnesota, the strategic rationale here is clear. Sorber posted impressive defensive metrics at Georgetown and demonstrated strong passing ability for a freshman center, recording more assists than turnovers.

If you squint, you can discern the potential outline of Isaiah Hartenstein, who is likely to become expendable as Oklahoma City`s young core becomes more expensive.

Given their lack of roster spots for multiple first-round picks, the Thunder deferred their No. 24 pick to a future draft in a deal with Sacramento. While this trade lacks significant upside (Oklahoma City cannot pick higher than No. 17 from this pick), it better aligns with the timeline for the reigning champions.

Barnhizer is expected to sign a two-way contract. He was an inefficient scorer in college (.500 true shooting percentage) but compiled steals and blocks effectively at Northwestern.

---

Orlando Magic: B+

Round 1: Jase Richardson (No. 25)
Round 2: Noah Penda (No. 32)

There`s a nice narrative symmetry in Richardson joining one of his father Jason Richardson`s four former NBA teams, and I also value the selection highly.

Richardson was projected in the lottery before his measurement of just over 6 feet barefoot at the NBA draft combine. Such significant shifts in perception always puzzle me; Richardson was still productive at Michigan State.

Orlando doesn`t require Richardson to contribute immediately, allowing him time to develop into a rotation player as the Magic begin to feel the effects of trading away four first-rounders to acquire Bane.

Orlando then paid a considerable price – picks 46 and 57, plus two future second-rounders – to move up and select Penda. Penda`s shooting is a work in progress; he made under 70% of his free throws last season.

---

Philadelphia 76ers: B+

Round 1: VJ Edgecombe (No. 3)
Round 2: Johni Broome (No. 35)

Although Knueppel was slightly higher in my projections, I likely would have chosen Edgecombe here as well. I appreciate his defensive foundation, highlighted by a very high steal rate at Baylor, and his athleticism which could enable him to become a shot creator.

Knueppel might have fit more seamlessly with Joel Embiid, but considering Embiid`s health status, I`m not certain that alignment should still dictate Philadelphia`s primary planning horizon.

A consensus first-team All-America selection last season, Broome could provide immediate assistance to the Sixers. He brings more offensive skill to the center position compared to the backups (Andre Drummond and Adem Bona) who struggled when filling in for Embiid last season.

---

Phoenix Suns: B

Round 1: Khaman Maluach (No. 10)
Round 2: Rasheer Fleming (No. 31), Koby Brea (No. 41)

A Duke center was available for the frontcourt-needy Suns, who also, somewhat coincidentally, traded to acquire former Duke center Mark Williams in a separate deal. It`s worth considering, especially in that context, whether Phoenix might have been better off pursuing the valuable trade-down opportunities that teams selecting just after them executed. However, with Maluach rated as the top prospect available on their board, staying put made sense for the Suns.

Phoenix used future picks to move up to the first pick of the second round and also acquired pick No. 41. Several teams were reportedly competing to select Saint Joseph`s forward Rasheer Fleming, who ranked 12th in my stats-only projections. Fleming adds another quality shot blocker for the Suns, this time with better shooting range. Although Brea is another shooting guard on a roster already deep at the position, Phoenix could utilize his elite shooting ability – he possesses the highest projected shooting skill of any player in my database – particularly if Grayson Allen is traded.

---

Portland Trail Blazers: C-

Round 1: Yang Hansen (No. 16)

Hansen might develop into an All-Star player. He could potentially lead the Blazers into championship contention. What is certain is that other teams did not value Hansen as highly as Portland did, indicating the team is staking its future on its ability to outperform the market in prospect evaluation.

To the Blazers` credit, they did acquire an additional first-round pick by moving down. However, they would have been significantly better off executing a trade similar to the one the Hawks made, if that opportunity was available.

---

Sacramento Kings: C

Round 1: Nique Clifford (No. 24)
Round 2: Maxime Raynaud (No. 42)

Having already sent the No. 13 pick to Atlanta to complete the Kevin Huerter trade, the Kings tapped into extra first-round selections acquired from the De`Aaron Fox deal to get back into the first round. Sacramento limited the potential risk of this move by adding top-16 protection to the pick, which has only a one-year window to convey.

My model was less favorable towards Clifford compared to scouts because he didn`t emerge as a serious NBA prospect until his fifth college year at age 23. Time will tell how much of his improvement represents genuine skill development versus simply leveraging an experience advantage that may not carry over to the NBA.

Scouts also rated Raynaud higher than my model, largely due to his relatively low block rate for a center. However, my model underestimated Quinten Post last year, and Raynaud brings a similar skill set, having made 67 three-pointers as a senior.

---

San Antonio Spurs: A

Round 1: Dylan Harper (No. 2), Carter Bryant (No. 14)

Harper was consistently projected as the consensus second overall pick, so apart from considering potential blockbuster trades, San Antonio`s work with that selection was straightforward and completed early.

The Spurs deserve more credit for their other lottery pick, where they patiently waited for Bryant to fall to them. I am high on Bryant`s potential as a 3-and-D player, making him an ideal fit on a team already rich in shot creation talent like Harper, Fox, and Victor Wembanyama.

---

Toronto Raptors: B

Round 1: Collin Murray-Boyles (No. 9)
Round 2: Alijah Martin (No. 39)

I believe Murray-Boyles` unconventional game can translate successfully to the NBA, although Toronto wasn`t the most ideal landing spot for him.

For him to thrive as a power forward, Murray-Boyles needs shooting threats around him. The Raptors currently have a non-shooting center in Jakob Poeltl and only average perimeter shooting.

If 2024 second-round pick Jonathan Mogbo develops a three-point shot after converting 24% as a rookie, the two undersized big men could form an interesting frontcourt pairing known for impactful defensive plays.

Martin is undersized for a shooting guard at 6-foot-2 but was productive in college. He ranked 26th in my stats-only projections.

---

Utah Jazz: B+

Round 1: Ace Bailey (No. 5), Walter Clayton Jr. (No. 18)
Round 2: John Tonje (No. 53)

I have previously compared Bailey to the Boston Celtics` duo of Jaylen Brown and Jayson Tatum when they entered the league, in the sense that he is joining a team that is far from being a contender, where he will need to refine his shot selection. That comparison feels particularly relevant now, as the same executives who drafted those wings (Austin and Danny Ainge) selected Bailey to join a Utah team still some distance away from winning.

The value proposition for Bailey, who ranked fifth in my model, makes sense at this pick. And I am not concerned about reports that Bailey preferred not to land in Utah. The Jazz will, however, need to carefully manage his development to help him become a perimeter star, just as the Celtics did with Brown and Tatum. Adding Clayton, an NCAA champion and proficient outside shooter, could assist in this process. Utah has a crowded backcourt, but veterans Jordan Clarkson and Collin Sexton may not remain part of the long-term picture, potentially creating an opportunity for Clayton.

At 24, Tonje was the oldest player drafted. He got to the free-throw line frequently (nearly seven times per game) at Wisconsin as a sixth-year senior, though this volume might be inflated due to his experience advantage. However, Tonje`s 91% free-throw shooting and 38% three-point shooting efficiency should translate effectively to the NBA.

---

Washington Wizards: B-

Round 1: Tre Johnson (No. 6), Will Riley (No. 21)
Round 2: Jamir Watkins (No. 43)

Similar to the Nets, the Wizards are strongly committing to a youth movement, adding two more teenagers to the four they acquired from the 2024 first round (including AJ Johnson, obtained at the deadline). I was skeptical of Tre Johnson as a top-five prospect due to his weak defensive metrics and low two-point field goal percentage. Outside that range, his potential as a shooter justifies the selection. Riley was picked slightly higher than his ranking in my projections; he will also need to improve his defensive playmaking.

Watkins, who will turn 24 in July, brings more experience. There is no doubt about Watkins` defensive potential, but he must improve his career 32.5% three-point shooting.