Walter Clayton Jr Draft Analysis

NBA Projection: Rotation Player

1. Draft Age

• 22.3 years (86th percentile amongst 1st round drafted players between 2004-2024)

2. Physical Tools

• Height without shoes: 6' 2.00''

• Wingspan: 6' 4.00''

• NBA Size: PG

3. NCAA Team Role:

• NCAA Starter at PG

• bpm: 8.6 (64th percentile amongst 1st round drafted players between 2004-2024)

• Strengths:

  • highest min_per on team

  • highest usg, ast%, pts/40 on team

  • good ast/tov

  • good FT%, 3P% and 3pa/100

  • decent stl%

  • shot creation (unassisted rim/mid/3 %)

• Flaws:

  • low orb% and drb%

  • low dunksmade/40

4. Nearest Neighbours within 2 years of Draft Age

• Neighbour means 2025 Draft Class ranks:

  • KNN Dist: 2 of 30

  • Neighbour NBA Adv Rank Mean: 8.25

    • NBA_Start% Rank: 13 of 30

    • BPM Rank: 5 of 30

    • WS/YEAR Rank: 7 of 30

    • VORP/YEAR Rank: 8 of 30

  • Overall:

    • 2nd closest neighbours

    • good production in NBA

1. Star: Brunson

2. Starters (NBA_Start% >= 50%): Brogdon, Allen, Brooks

3. Rotation (VORP>=0): Pritchard, Butler, DiVincenzo, Merrill, Crawford

4. Fringe (VORP<0): Simpson

5. Analysis

1. Clayton in his NCAA career

   1. consistent high FT% and 3P% and 3pa/100

   2. 2P% consistent

   3. stl% and blk% decent

   4. ast% uptick as senior

   5. ast/tov decent

   6. rim shooting% up as senior

   7. dunksmade/40 consistent

   8. big increase in unassisted 3% as senior

2. His lone star neighbour is Brunson, also a very close combine neighbour with Clayton 1 inch taller, same wingspan and weight and Brunson 0.5 years younger. Brunson became an All-NBA player after being a 2nd round pick and starting as a 6th man.

   1. Clayton adv: FT%, blk%, 3pa/100, 3 rate, unassisted mid/3%,

   2. Brunson adv: 2P%, ast%, ast/tov, ftr, rim/mid shooting %

   3. similar: age, bpm, rb%, stl%

   4. NBA: ast% and ast/tov increased, shooting 49%/39%/82%

   5. Clayton is more 3P oriented than Brunson, while Brunson is better at 2s and playmaking, which would make him better able to be a primary scorer. A Dallas 6th man Brunson outcome is possible for Clayton without the All-NBA Knick upside.

3. There’s a couple of occasional starter or 6th man PG neighbours in Brogdon, Pritchard. Brogdon is the closest neighbour to Clayton, but has a significant height and wingspan advantage allowing Brogdon to function as a SG while Clayton is limited to PG.

   1. Clayton adv: 1.2 years younger, ast%, 2P%, blk%, 3pa/100, 3 rate, shot creation (unassisted rim/mid/3%)

   2. Brogdon adv: SG size, ast/tov

   3. similar: 3P%, stl%, dunksmade/40

   4. NBA: ast% and ast/tov increased, shooting 46%/39%/87%

   5. Clayton is a younger and better PG prospect than Brogdon who has been a solid starting PG and 6th Man. Brogdon’s size allows him to function as an offball SG. A 6th man PG version of Brogdon would be a realistic outcome for Clayton.

4. Pritchard is the reigning 6th man of the year as a PG with likely smaller physical tools than Clayton

   1. Clayton adv: FT%, blk%, 3pa/100, 3 rate, unassisted mid/3/dunk%, rim/mid shooting %, dunksmade/40

   2. Pritchard adv: ast%, rim rate, unassisted rim%

   3. similar: age, 2P%, 3P%, ast/tov, stl%

   4. NBA: ast% dropped (more offball) and ast/tov increased, shooting 45%/40%/86%

   5. Pritchard would be an outstanding and realistic outcome for Clayton. Clayton has the shooting adv which would fit Pritchard’s current NBA role of a 6th man focusing on 3s and less playmaking than in the NCAA

5. There are a couple of SG neighbours: DiVincenzo, Allen and Brooks that have a size advantage on Clayton and better suited to play an offball SG role. This path for Clayton to start requires him paired with a large playmaker that can guard the bigger SG while Clayton guards PG.

6. Butler is 1.5 years younger and very similar size to Clayton. They both won Most Outstanding Player in the NCAA their draft year.

   1. Clayton adv: FT%, 3pa/100, unassisted mid/3%

   2. Butler adv: age, ast%, stl%

   3. similar: 2P%, 3P%, ast/tov

   4. NBA: shooting 45%/34%/82% with increased ast% and ast/tov

7. Merrill is 1.8 years older and is a 3 point specialist off the bench shooting 41%/39%/93% in a more limited role than the neighbours above as he decreased his playmaking in the NBA. Clayton’s NCAA 2P%/3P%/FT% are similar to Merrill’s so he can function in a limited role as well.

8. Crawford is a 6th man with a positive VORP despite shooting 41%/32%/83% in the NBA. Crawford is more SG sized and 0.7 years younger. This is a floor case for Clayton as he was a better NCAA shooter and playmaker. Crawford shows that even if Clayton’s excellent NCAA shooting doesn’t translate, he can still be a positive rotation player with a solid ast% and ast/tov

9. Simpson is a rookie PG that is 0.4 years younger and 2 inches shorter than Clayton. He was a better playmaker and similar level shooter. He’s struggled early in his NBA career shooting 35%/25%/82% splits.

10. Clayton had the 6th closest mean of 10 neighbours and good NBA production compared to other prospects in the 2025 draft class. I like Clayton’s chances of being a positive rotation players due to a couple of possible roles similar to his neighbours

    1. 6th man of the year PG: Dallas Brunson, Brogdon, Pritchard

       1. he likely would be most similar to Pritchard’s role focusing more on 3s than playmaking

    2. backup PG: Butler and Crawford

       1. worse shooters than the neighbours above, but still positive rotation players

    3. small SG next to big playmaker: Allen, DiVincenzo, Merrill (bench version)

       1. similar to Pritchard’s NBA role with less playmaking

Predicted NBA Outcome: Rotation Player

Appendix: