Liam McNeeley Draft Analysis

NBA Projection: Fringe / Rotation Player

1. Draft Age

• 19.7 years (32nd percentile amongst 1st round drafted players between 2004-2024)

2. Physical Tools

• Height without shoes: 6' 6.75''

• Wingspan: 6' 8.50''

• NBA Size: SG

3. NCAA Team Role:

• NCAA Starter at SG/Wing

• bpm: 1.1 (1st percentile amongst 1st round drafted players between 2004-2024)

• Strengths:

  • highest usg on team with 2nd highest pts/40

  • high FT%

  • ast/tov

  • high 3pa/100

  • slightly above average unassisted rim/mid%

• Flaws:

  • very low bpm

  • below average orb%

  • below average 3P%

  • low stl%

  • very low rim finishing % (only 0.49!)

  • below average mid finishing %

  • 4 dunks the entire year (dunksmade/40 of 0.18)

  • below average unassisted 3% (pull up threes)

4. Nearest Neighbours within 2 years of Draft Age

• Neighbour means 2025 Draft Class ranks:

  • KNN Dist: 11 of 30

  • Neighbour NBA Adv Rank Mean: 18.75

    • NBA_Start% Rank: 11 of 30

    • BPM Rank: 24 of 30

    • WS/YEAR Rank: 20 of 30

    • VORP/YEAR Rank: 20 of 30

  • Overall:

    • moderately close neighbours

    • below average production in NBA

1. Star: Edwards, Ingram

2. Starters (NBA_Start% >= 50%): Harris, George

3. Rotation (VORP>=0): Okogie

4. Fringe (VORP<0): Young, Rivers, Langford, Knox, McGowens

5. Analysis

McNeeley is a one-dimensional 3 point specialist who wasn’t even great at it. This led to him having a bpm of 1.1, by far the lowest amongst all 2025 draft prospect and ranking in the 1st percentile amongst 1st Round Draft Picks between 2004 and 2024 (and 2nd overall amongst all draft picks in that range). If McNeeley becomes a NBA star, or even just a starter, I’m seriously going to need to question the application of bpm in evaluating NCAA prospects.

1. The only positives in McNeeley’s profile are a high FT%, high 3pa/100 and ast/tov of 1.22. He shot only 0.32 from the shorter NCAA 3 point line with only 7% of them pull up threes. That’s not going to cut it for a NBA 3 point sniper especially with the longer 3 point line. The rest of his game is lacking. His role player stats are all low (orb%, blk%, stl%). His 2P% is extremely low at 0.44 with a rim shooting % at 0.49 (somehow missed more than scored at the rim in the NCAA as a 6’7 wing), a mid range shooting % of 0.35 and a dunksmade/40 of 0.18.

2. He might have a role as a bench 3 point sniper like Sam Hauser where the only purpose is to get as many 3s off movement as possible in limited minutes. But he has to be a very good movement 3 point shooter and on the longer 3 point line. Barring that, he provides no other role player value in the NBA.

3. The stars, Edwards and Ingram are extremely unlikely possibilities. It did make me realize Edwards far exceeded his NCAA stats in the NBA. Ingram has superior physical tools and improved immensely in the NBA.

4. Harris is a solid starter, but he has a longer wingspan and much better NCAA production.

5. Then after that there are a bunch of fringe players which have not shot higher than 35% in the NBA. Unless McNeeley shoots significantly better than this, he will likely join them on this list.

Predicted NBA Outcome: Fringe/Rotation Player

Appendix:

1. Star: Edwards, Ingram

   1. Edwards

      1. similar

         1. no combine

         2. 3P%

         3. unassisted rim/mid%

      2. disadvantages

         1. orb%

         2. FT%

         3. ftr

         4. ast/tov

         5. rim rate

         6. mid shooting %

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. 0.8 years younger

         3. ast%

         4. 2P%

         5. blk% stl%

         6. pts/40

         7. 3pa/100

         8. unassisted 3/dunk%

         9. dunksmade/40

         10. rim shooting %

      4. NBA changes

         1. 3P% up to 0.35

         2. ast% up and to% down

         3. pts/40 up by 4.39

         4. ast/tov up o 1.41

   2. Ingram

      1. similar

         1. 2P%

         2. ftr

         3. 3pa/100

      2. disadvantages

         1. ast% and ast/tov

         2. FT%

         3. 3pa/100

         4. rim rate

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. 0.9 years younger

         3. didn’t measure at combine, Wing size

         4. orb%

         5. 3P%

         6. stl% blk%

         7. pts/40

         8. shot creation: unassisted rim/mid/dunk%

         9. dunksmade/40

         10. rim finishing % and mid finishing %

      4. Ingram NBA changes

         1. FT% improved greatly

         2. ast/tov and ast% improved greatly

         3. mid range rate and shooting % increased greatly

         4. defensive stats decreased

2. Starters (NBA_Start% >= 50%): Harris, George

   1. Harris

      1. similar

         1. 0.8 years younger

         2. 3P%

         3. stl%

         4. ftr

         5. rim rate

         6. mid shooting %

      2. disadvantages

         1. ast% and ast/tov

         2. FT%

         3. 2P%

         4. blk%

         5. 3pa/100

         6. mid shooting %

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. same height with longer wingspan

         3. orb%

         4. 2P%

         5. pts/40

         6. 3pa/100

         7. unassisted rim/mid/dunk %

         8. dunksmade/40

         9. rim shooting %

      4. NBA stat changes

         1. FT% and 3P% increased

         2. decreased rim rate and increased 3 rate

         3. decreased rebounding

         4. increased ast%

         5. decreased blk%

         6. ast/tov increased to 1.71

   2. George

      1. similar

         1. 0.1 years younger

         2. orb%

         3. 2P% and 3P%

         4. blk%

         5. unassisted rim%

         6. dunksmade/40

         7. mid shooting %

      2. disadvantages

         1. no combine: PG or small SG size

         2. FT%

         3. ftr

         4. ast/tov

         5. rim rate

         6. dunk shooting %

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. ast%

         3. stl%

         4. pts/40

         5. 3pa/100

         6. unassisted 3%

         7. rim shooting %

      4. NBA changes

         1. decreased rebounding

         2. ast% up and to% down

         3. ast/tov up to 1.92

         4. usg down

3. Rotation (VORP>=0): Okogie

   1. Okogie

      1. similar

         1. 0.1 years younger

         2. shorter with much longer wingspan

         3. 2P%

      2. disadvantages

         1. FT%

         2. ast/tov

         3. 3pa/100

         4. unassisted rim %

         5. mid finishing %

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. orb%

         3. ast%

         4. 3P%

         5. much higher blk% and stl%

         6. ftr

         7. rim rate

         8. dunksmade/40

         9. rim finishing %

         10. unassisted mid/3/dunk %

      4. NBA changes

         1. FT% and 3P% dropped

         2. 2P% rose, but still poor 0.49

         3. ast% and usg dropped heavily

         4. ast/tov rose to 1.5

4. Fringe (VORP<0): Young, Rivers, Langford, Knox, McGowens

   1. Young

      1. similar

         1. closest statistical match

         2. orb%

         3. 2P%

         4. blk% and stl%

         5. pts/40

         6. 3pa/100

         7. shot creation: unassisted rim/mid/3/dunk %

         8. mid shooting %

      2. disadvantages

         1. ast% and ast/tov

         2. FT%

         3. rim rate

      3. advantages

         1. 0.9 years younger

         2. slightly shorter with much longer wingspan

         3. ast%

         4. dusnkmade/40

         5. rim shooting %

      4. NBA changes

         1. usg down

         2. 3P% dropped to 0.29

         3. FT% dropped to 0.56

         4. 3 rate increased

         5. ast% big drop

         6. ast/tov rose to 1.5

   2. Rivers

      1. similar

         1. 0.2 years older

         2. ast%

         3. 2P%

         4. pts/40

         5. rim rate

         6. dunksmade/40

         7. mid shooting %

      2. disadvantages

         1. big PG or small SG size

         2. orb%

         3. FT%

         4. blk%

         5. ast/tov

         6. 3pa/100

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. 3P%

         3. stl%

         4. shot creation: unassisted rim/3/dunk %

         5. rim shooting %

      4. NBA changes

         1. usg down

         2. ast/tov up to 2.1

   3. Langford

      1. similar

         1. 0.1 years younger

         2. shorter with longer wingspan

         3. ast% and ast/tov

         4. stl%

         5. rim rate

         6. unassisted mid%

         7. mid shooting %

      2. disadvantages

         1. FT% and 3P%

         2. 3pa/100

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. orb%

         3. 2P%

         4. blk%

         5. unassisted rim/3%

         6. dunksmade/40

         7. rim shooting %

      4. NBA changes

         1. rim rate down

         2. ftr down

         3. ast% and usg large decrease

   4. Knox

      1. similar

         1. 0.8 years younger

         2. orb%

         3. 3P%

         4. blk%

      2. disadvantages

         1. ast%

         2. FT%

         3. 3pa/100

         4. rim rate

         5. unassisted rim/mid%

      3. advantages

         1. bpm

         2. taller and longer wingspan

         3. 2P%

         4. stl%

         5. dunksmade/40

         6. rim and mid shooting %

      4. NBA changes

         1. ast% down

         2. ast/tov up but still negative ratio

   5. McGowens

      1. similar

         1. 0.1 years younger

         2. slightly shorter with similar wingspan

         3. FT%

         4. blk% and stl%

         5. mid shooting %

      2. disadvantages

         1. negative bpm

         2. orb%

         3. ast%

         4. 3P%

         5. negative ast/tov

         6. 3pa/100

      3. advantages

         1. 2P%

         2. pts/40

         3. rim rate

         4. shot creation: unassisted rim/mid/3/dunk%

         5. dunksmade/40

         6. rim shooting %

      4. NBA changes

         1. 3P% up to 0.32

         2. rim rate down

         3. unassisted 2 and 3% down

         4. usg down by 11%

         5. ast/tov up to 1.29