NBA Draft rankings 2025: Top 60 big board of prospects

The 2025 NBA Draft was always going to look good in comparison to its predecessor. The 2024 draft lack a consensus top dog and largely consisted of prospects believed to top out as role players. The 2025 draft class has the opposite problem: after you get past Cooper Flagg, there are a bunch of high-upside oddballs in this class who could turn into stars, or just as easily flame out.

So much has changed since our first 2025 draft board was published the day after the 2024 draft. Flagg, Dylan Harper, Ace Bailey, VJ Edgecombe, Khaman Maluach, and Tre Johnson have maintained as the top-8 prospects we expected them to be coming into the season, but new names like Jeremiah Fears and Kon Knueppel crashed the party, while prospects like Nolan Traore fell in the eyes of scouts, and some highly-touted freshmen chose to return to school for their sophomore seasons.

Is the 2025 NBA Draft class a good one? It’s complicated. Flagg is better than the typical No. 1 overall prospect, and Harper feels like a stronger pick at No. 2 than most of the players who have gone in that spot over the last 10 years. The strength of this class ultimately feels like it will be determined by how players like Fears, Maluach, and Derik Queen turn out. You could tell me any of them could be All-Stars before their rookie contract expires, and I’d believe you. I’d also believe it if any of them had trouble hanging on to a rotation spot four years into their careers.

Evaluating this draft class is largely about risk assessment, slightly more so than usual in my eyes as someone who has been writing about the draft here since 2013. Would you be willing to bet on Queen’s elite driving ability and scoring touch translating to the highest level, or are you more worried he’s a zero position defender with a poor motor who even showed up out of shape to the combine? A player like Duke’s Knueppel probably has less star equity than most of his top-10 peers, but he feels like the safest bet to be a really good role player. Where this draft really takes a hit is with the depth. The quality of the class falls off around pick No. 20 after so many talented prospects chose to return to school for huge NIL bags.

Here’s our final 2025 NBA Draft big board, with tons of analysis after the table.

Tier 1: Likely superstar bet

1.1: Cooper Flagg, F, Duke

The sell: Flagg’s combination of incredible production at a historically young age with outstanding physical tools and an elite mentality gives him a case for being the best American-born NBA prospect since LeBron James. Flagg was legitimately the best player in college basketball despite being 17 years old until Dec. 21, making him the youngest player in this draft class. He shot the cover off the ball after turning 18 years old (45% from three on 91 attempts) to answer the lone lingering question about his skill set. Flagg entered Duke as a player who could greatly impact the game off the ball on both ends of the floor. As a freshman, he proved he could already be an elite offensive engine with the ball in his hands, flashing high-level passing reads, driving ability, and a pull-up jumper. It’s not often that the most talented player on the floor also plays the hardest, but that’s Flagg. While I’m a bit worried about the situation he’s stepping into in Dallas, Flagg is the ultimate winner, and he should fuel team success for a long while playing at a First-Team All-NBA caliber level.

What could go wrong? Flagg’s shooting and handle will determine his ceiling. I wouldn’t bet against him.

Tier 2: Safer star bet/elite role player

2.2: Dylan Harper, G, Rutgers

The sell: Harper is a huge lead guard at 6’6 with a 6’10 wingspan with a special skill for getting downhill. The Rutgers freshman split ball screens with ease and converted 70 percent at the rim (10 percent higher than Flagg) with more than 82 percent of those being self-created without an assist. Harper is a bit more of a scorer than a playmaker at this stage, but he still showed good vision on live dribble passes that his teammates often couldn’t convert. He should be a good defensive guard at the point of attack with enough size to switch onto wings. While Harper’s elite driving ability is his calling card, he’s also a good off-ball player who shot well on spot-ups (37 percent on catch-and-shoot threes) and thrived attacking tilted defenses off the catch. Every team in the league wants big guards who can bend the opposing defense and capably fit alongside other stars, and Harper is exactly that.

What could go wrong? Harper’s shooting is a real question. He only made 33.3 percent of his threes, and was particularly bad at pull-ups. He also doesn’t have much of a mid-range game right now, which will be an essential development for his star-level outcome. For a player so reliant on attacking the rim, Harper also isn’t an elite above-the-rim athlete. If he continues to struggle shooting off the dribble and has problems finishing over NBA rim protectors, he could be more of a high-level role player than a future All-Star.

Tier 3: High-end role player bets and lower probability star bet

3.3: Khaman Maluach, C, Duke

The sell: Maluach has elite size for an NBA center at almost 7’1 barefoot with a nearly 7’7 wingspan. He was super efficient in a narrow role for Duke as a freshman, posting 73.6 percent true shooting with 77 percent shooting at the rim. He’s going to be a devastating roller and dunker spot finisher in the NBA on offense, and he’s going to be a major paint deterrent defensively on his size alone. What’s really exciting about Maluach’s game is his potential to develop his three-point shooting and perimeter defense. Duke didn’t want him shooting threes and he only went 4-for-16 on the season from deep, but he well from the foul line (76.6 percent, better than Harper) and he was a willing shooter in the BAL before coming to Duke. The Blue Devils switched him a lot defensively, and he showed pretty quick feet away from the basket. Maluach has only been playing the sport for five years, and he’s already an effective player with so much room to grow. He wants the three ball to be part of his package long-term, and if that happens, having a monstrous center who can stretch the floor, hit his free throws, and have enough mobility to play multiple coverages sounds like a potential star to me.

What could go wrong? Maluach is a lot less interesting if the shooting never comes around, and it’s a bit theoretical at this stage. He can be a bit slow to get off the ground as a leaper, and often feels a split second late on his shot blocking attempts. He also has bad hands, and can’t really make passing reads after finishing with a terrible 4.3 percent assist rate. It’s tough to fully buy into a player who struggles to make decisions with the ball, but Maluach’s long-term upside as a play-finisher is still too intriguing to pass on after Flagg and Harper.

3.4: Kon Knueppel, G, Duke

The sell: Knueppel blends on-ball and off-ball value offensively with deadly shooting and the ability to run secondary actions as a handler. Shooting will be his calling card in the league: he drained 40.6 percent of his threes and 91.4 percent of his free throws as a freshman at Duke. Knueppel can run around the arc and hit shots off movement, giving him the type of gravity that makes life easier for his teammates and unlocks the rest of his offensive game. He developed a strong connection with Maluach as a pick-and-roll playmaker, and he’s skilled at playing off two-feet in the paint as a scorer. He already has a strong 220-pound frame that should help him avoid being targeted defensively. When Flagg was asked what he’d need to survive an apocalypse, he said “Some food, a gun and Kon Knueppel,” which is a wonderful endorsement of his teammate’s mentality. Knueppel doesn’t have as much upside as some others ranked below him, but he feels like a safe bet to be a high-end role player.

What could go wrong? Knueppel’s mix of length and explosiveness is pedestrian for an NBA wing, and that might be putting it kindly. He only converted 2-of-5 dunk attempts as a freshman, and he’s a bit screen dependent to get by his initial defender. I worry a bit about Knueppel’s ability to get around screens in the NBA, and I think faster ball handlers could give him problems as an iso defender. He doesn’t have a ton of downhill scoring punch as a driver. There’s a world where Knueppel gets pigeonholed as a shooter, and proves to be a decent role player while failing to return top value.

3.5: VJ Edgecombe, G, Baylor

The sell: Edgecombe has a strong foundation to be a useful player thanks to his nuclear athleticism, solid spot-up three-point shooting, and ability to force turnovers on defense. He has a case as the most explosive athlete in the class as a quick-twitch freak who looks like he can fly in his best moments. He has elite burst to get by his initial defender or out-run him in transition, and he explodes off the ground as a leaper at both ends of the floor. Edgecombe has plenty of off-ball utility, too, as a catch-and-shoot threat from three who also rebounds really well for a guard. He’s also a good ball mover as a passer even if he rarely makes great reads. High-end outcomes like prime Victor Oladipo are possible if he adds craft as a finisher and starts to develop a pull-up shooting game that currently isn’t present.

What could go wrong? For such an explosive athlete, it’s odd that Edgecombe only made 60.3 percent of his layups. He often didn’t seem to have his footwork down when attacking the rim and tried to rely on his elite hang-time instead of driving closer to the hoop before leaping. His lack of pull-up shooting handicaps his ceiling at the moment, and should be a big focal point of improvement for the team that drafts him. It’s possible he’s more of a lower-usage player if his off-the-dribble attacking never comes around, and in that case he probably doesn’t end up as a top-5 player in this class.

3.6: Collin Murray-Boyles, F/C, South Carolina

The sell: Murray-Boyles has a case as the best defensive prospect in the class. He shows terrific anticipation defensively with elite hands that can rip the ball away from opponents. He’s a capable secondary rim protector, a menace blitzing pick-and-rolls, and an excellent rebounder. Offensively, CMB took a leap as a ball handler to turn into a bully-ball scoring threat off the dribble. His best offensive skill is his passing, with short-roll playmaking, high-low feeds to fellow bigs, and some live dribble dimes to the arc all in his bag. Murray-Boyles also has length (7’1 wingspan) and strength in full supply, which helps make up for his lack of height. He posted outstanding production at a young age for two straight seasons (he’s six months younger than Derik Queen despite being a sophomore), and just seems to have all the intangibles teams want in a winning player. Read my feature on Murray-Boyles’ rise into a lottery pick and determination to improve as a shooter.

What could go wrong? The obvious hole in Murray-Boyles’ skill set is his shooting. He only made 9-of-39 attempts from three (23.1 percent) across two college seasons. It feels like he’s at his best at center, but he only measured 6’6.5 barefoot at the combine. His shooting will come under more of a microscope as a forward. He’s also not the most explosive leaper around the basket, which is a bit concerning for a player without shooting ability. The dream of CMB being Julius Randle on offense and something like Draymond Green on defense sounds nice, but the margins will be slim with his height/shooting questions.

3.7: Jeremiah Fears, G, Oklahoma

The sell: Fears looked like a superstar guard at times while lifting Oklahoma to an NCAA tournament bid in the toughest conference in the country despite only spending three years in high school. He has the best combination of speed and ball handling in the class, getting wherever he wants on the floor with elite burst and tight crossovers. He’s not a consistent shooter yet, but there are plenty of encouraging signs for his development: he proved his NBA range with 16 made threes beyond 25-feet, he shot 85 percent from the foul line, and show fantastic touch from mid-range with 45 percent shooting. His defense is a work in progress, but the fact that he was able to consistently generate steals (3.1 percent steal rate) is encouraging. He’s a creative passer off a live dribble, and he can use his scoring gravity to open up windows to get the ball to teammates. He was a foul magnet all year who defenses struggled to stop without sending him to the line. Fears took on massive 31.5 percent usage in the SEC despite an Oct. 2006 birthday. After surviving being thrown into the SEC fire, it feels like Fears could be ready to explode if he can add weight and fine-tune certain aspects of his skill set.

What could go wrong? Fears’ shooting, finishing, and defense are all question marks. He only made 53 percent of his layups, and which makes me worry he could struggle to score over NBA rim protectors. He made just 28.4 percent of his threes, and was especially bad on pull-up threes (20.5 percent), an essential shot for his high-end outcomes. He’ll be at a big strength disadvantage defensively early in his career, and probably has to guard the worst offensive player on the opposing team at all times. Fears also had turnover problems as a lead decision-maker, and he doesn’t provide much value off-the-ball offensively. There’s an enormously high bar to clear to be a primary offensive engine in the NBA, and Fears has a lot of questions to answer to get there.

3.8: Ace Bailey, F, Rutgers

The sell: Bailey has a tremendous combination of length, athleticism, and shot-making as a young forward who won’t turn 19 years old until mid-August. He’s wired to get buckets, and dropped some huge scoring performances against Big Ten defenses. I was in the gym to see Bailey hang 37 points on Northwestern on only 10 dribbles, a rise-and-fire masterclass that showcased how difficult it is to bother his shot. Bailey can also recover to the ball in spectacular fashion defensively with his secondary shot-blocking skills, and looked like a reliable rebounder. It’s easy to dream on Bailey star upside because of his tools and shooting, but those same qualities should also give him a high-floor as an off-ball scorer who is more of complimentary piece.

What could go wrong? Bailey is poor ball handler with almost zero passing vision right now. He only posted an 8.3 percent assist rate and frequently missed open teammates to settle for difficult pull-ups. He can’t put pressure on the rim as a driver yet, and he rarely got easy points at the free throw line. Bailey’s mentality is a real question: he mostly takes mid-range shots that won’t be as welcome in the NBA, and he reportedly wants a high-usage role early in his career that he likely won’t be ready for. He just feels like a bit of a space cadet out there at times, but it’s important to remember he’s extremely young for this class.

3.9: Tre Johnson, G, Texas

The sell: Johnson feels like the best shot-maker in this class. He’s a deadly movement shooter who can bend defenses with his gravity running around the arc. He can bang threes over contests (he made 41.6 percent of his threes while guarded), he’s got a strong pull-up game from deep and mid-range, and he’s got a quick enough release to really ramp up the volume. Johnson also has a competitive mentality that should help him get better over the years. He showed enough competence as a driver, passer, and defender to avoid being a specialist in the NBA, and his one elite skill can swing games when he gets hot.

What could go wrong? Johnson isn’t exactly a power athlete at this stage. He has a thin frame that will put him at a strength disadvantage early in his career, and his defense is never going to be what gets him on the floor. How Johnson develops as a driver and finisher over NBA length will be a big question, because his shooting plays from anywhere.

3.10: Noa Essengue, F, Ulm

The sell: Essengue is the second youngest player in this draft class behind Flagg, and he’s already proven he can be productive in a pro league. The French forward has been an efficient scorer (62.5 percent true shooting), a big-time defensive playmaker, and a demon in the open floor who forces teams to follow him at a fantastic rate. Essengue has an elite bundle of tools with a phenomenal combination of size (6’10 barefoot with a 7’1 wingspan) and athleticism. He’s already excellent at switching screens and guarding the ball against quicker forwards, and he should have the length to protect the rim as he gets stronger. While he remains far from a finished product, Essengue’s size/athleticism combo and strong production against older professional competition is an encouraging sign for his future growth.

What could go wrong? Essengue’s dribble/pass/shoot skill set very much remains a work in progress. He only made 27.8 percent of his threes this year and 70 percent of his free throws. He can show a nice handle in the open floor at times, but he struggles against ball pressure. His assist rate (8.6 percent) is among the worst in the class. Essengue is also very skinny at the moment and it’s hard to predict if he will be able to bulk up and put on weight. It’s a bit scary to bet on someone who remains this raw in terms of his frame, handle, and shooting as he’s about to be the second youngest player in the NBA next year.

3.11: Derik Queen, F/C, Maryland

The sell: Queen’s self-creation is a distinctive skill for a player his size. At 6’10, 250 pounds, Queen proved to be a dynamic driver who could pull opposing bigs away from the hoop and cook them off the dribble. He has an overwhelming combination of quickness and power in tight spaces, and he has counters when his initial move gets stopped. He’s strong enough to finish through contact, and he got to the foul line a ton, where he made 76.6 percent of his free throws. Queen has solid passing vision when the double comes, and can score or pass with either hand. He was a really good rebounder on both ends of the floor this season. Queen’s scoring upside is huge, and he’s a good enough decision-maker and free throw shooter to warrant a high-usage role. If it all comes together, it feel like there could be All-Star upside here.

What could go wrong? Queen just doesn’t have much role player utility. He’s a poor defensive player who doesn’t provide much rim protection. He was often lazy closing out to shooters, and just generally seemed to play with a low motor. Conditioning was an issue for Queen during his freshman year, and it feels like he even showed up to the combine out of shape after testing so poorly in athletic drills. He also only made 7-of-35 threes (20 percent) this year, and just can’t be counted on to be a reliable floor spacer yet. If Queen doesn’t hit his highest-end outcomes as an on-ball engine, his downside is scary with a poor defensive and shooting projection.

3.12: Kasparas Jakucionis, G, Illinois

The sell: Jakucionis is a big guard who put together a solid statistical profile at Illinois with flashes of outstanding passing vision, pull-up shooting potential, an ability to take and make a lot of free throws. He excels in the pick-and-roll game and loves to find creative angles to deliver the ball to his bigs or kick out to shooters. Jakucionis isn’t an great athlete, but he still scored well against set defenses, with 57.9 percent true shooting in the halfcourt (per DataBallr) and a huge 49.5 percent free throw rate. The step-back three is an essential part of his game, and how deadly it becomes could ultimately determine his ceiling. Jakucionis hunted bigs on the switch to get into his side-step and step-backs, and he was especially good at hitting them going left. He also showed some idea of how to play off the ball, getting downhill after dribble-handoffs and looking okay on spot-up threes (34.6 percent) even if he prefers to shoot off the dribble. If Jakucionis can cut down on the turnovers and consistently hit his pull-up threes, he can be an above-average starter in the league for a long time.

What could go wrong? Jakucionis has a gigantic turnover problem. He turned the ball over six times in each of Illinois’ Big Ten tournament and NCAA tournament games, and he ended the year with a historically bad 25.4 percent turnover rate. He particularly struggled with blitzes, often picking up his dribble too early and failing to find a release valve. Part of the issue with the turnovers is that Jakucionis can’t really blow by anymore. He’s an average athlete at best who only dunked the ball one time this season. His defense is also striving just to be average, and he’s likely going to have issues getting over screens in the league defensively. Can the turnovers be corrected with experience? They better be if he’s going to reach his considerable ceiling.

3.13: Jase Richardson, G, Michigan State

The sell: Richardson is an elite three-point shooter who also happens to be super smart guard with the ball. Michigan State had him buried on the bench until Feb. and kept him in a small role (19.4 percent usage) all year, but the freshman’s high feel for the game and off-ball scoring eventually shined through. Richardson hit 41.2 percent of his threes on the year, including a 50 percent mark on open catch-and-shoot attempts and a 39.5 percent mark on guarded spot-up threes. He’s at his best relocating around the arc to find soft spots in the defense to get himself a three-point look. Richardson isn’t nearly as explosive as his father (long-time NBA wing Jason Richardson) was, but he still made 69 percent of his rim attempts on the season with only five dunks. The success of another small guard in Jared McCain with knockdown shooting and without elite athleticism should only boost optimism of Richardson’s NBA translation.

What could go wrong? Richardson is very small for a guard in today’s game, measuring at 6-foot barefoot, though he does have solid length with a 6’6 wingspan. There just aren’t many players as small as Richardson in the NBA these days. Richardson also has a scary injury history after needing a procedure to fix a hole in his femur during high school. He didn’t have any injury issues at MSU this past year, but it could still concern teams looking into his long-term projection.

Tier 4: Role player bets without the ceiling

Let’s quickly hit on some of our favorite mid-first round picks this year.

4.14: Thomas Sorber, C, Georgetown

The sell: Sober is an old school big man who can protect the paint, clean the glass, and offer some slick passing to grease the wheels of any offense. While he’s a tad short for an NBA center at 6’9 barefoot, his ridiculous 7’6 wingspan easily makes up for it. Sorber is just a massive human with a 262-pound frame that will be among the NBA’s heaviest from the moment he’s drafted. If you want a big man who does big man stuff, Sorber is your guy,

What could go wrong? Sorber just plays a little heavy. He doesn’t get off the ground quickly as a leaper and his mobility is only average. He also doesn’t really shoot after making 6-of-37 attempts from three-point range on the year. Developing his shot would be the biggest swing factor for his long-term outcome.

4.15: Carter Bryant, F, Arizona

The sell: Bryant has a fantastic mix of size, explosiveness, defensive playmaking, and spot-up shooting for an NBA wing. At 6’8 with a 7-foot wingspan and 215-pound frame, he has a clear translation as a wing defender who can also space the floor on offense. Bryant posted a 5.8 percent block rate and 2.8 percent steal rate this year, both strong numbers that prove his athleticism. Bryant made 37.1 percent of his threes on 105 attempts this year. He can model his game off the success of a player like Portland forward Toumani Camara.

What could go wrong? Carter can’t do much on offense in the halfcourt other than take catch-and-shoot threes and finish on some cuts to the basket. More than 77 percent of his shots were assisted this year, making him a player who can’t do anything off the bounce yet. His threes better keep falling in that case, and his volume is already pretty low.

4.16: Nique Clifford, F, Colorado State

The sell: Clifford was initially a defensive specialist to start his college career at Colorado. Upon transferring to Colorado State, he took a big leap as a shooter. After flirting with the NBA Draft a year ago, he returned to school and took another leap as a playmaker. He’s tough, well-rounded wing who brings a little bit of everything to the table, and should be an instant contributor on the glass.

What could go wrong? Clifford lacks an elite skill to be his calling card. He also had turnover problems throughout his college career, which a bit troubling for a five-year college player in a mid-major conference.

3 prospects we’re lower on in the 2025 NBA Draft

Read my take on Egor Demin, Danny Wolf, and Liam McNeeley, three talented prospects who I’m fading in this class compared to consensus.

Final NBA mock draft: Read our latest projection

Here’s our final 2025 NBA mock draft, updated after the NBA Finals and Kevin Durant trade. With reports that Phoenix is looking to target a forward or center with the No. 10 pick, watch out for South Carolina’s Collin Murray-Boyles, French prospect Joan Beringer, and Georgetown’s Thomas Sorber for that pick.

What else can I read on the 2025 NBA Draft here?

Have questions on more prospects? Ask away in the comments

The first-round of the 2025 NBA Draft takes places in prime time on Wednesday, June 25. The second round will follow the next day. Happy draft season.