Transcript: ESPN 2015 NBA Draft Media Call with Fran Fraschilla and Tom Penn

Transcript: ESPN 2015 NBA Draft Media Call with Fran Fraschilla and Tom Penn

This afternoon, we had ESPN college basketball analyst Fran Fraschilla and ESPN NBA analyst Tom Penn on a media call to discuss the 2015 NBA Draft, which will be exclusively televised on ESPN for the 13th consecutive year on Thursday, June 25 at 7 p.m. ET. During the Draft, Fraschilla will deliver analysis on international players and Penn will provide NBA Draft front office perspective on site at the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, N.Y.

Audio Replay: Click here

More details on ESPN NBA Draft Coverage: Click here

Q.  What are your thoughts on Dakari Johnson?

FRAN FRASCHILLA:  Well, Dakari is, first of all, given Kentucky’s platoon system this year and the fact that this was Dakari’s second year at Kentucky, obviously he probably didn’t get the reps, the touches in the low post, the exposure that he would have gotten had Kentucky not had such a tremendous team.

Basically the way NBA teams look at Dakari right now, he is a young sophomore, young for his age.  He has the size to be an NBA center, obviously.  He’s done a terrific job in the last 12 months of refining his body, losing weight, adding muscle, and my evaluation of him is that he’s a very safe late‑first‑round to mid‑second‑round pick, in part because this league is ‑‑ although the league has gone to a small‑ball type of game, it’s still about positional size, size at every position.

If you can get a guy like Dakari, late first, early second round, which is where I peg him, you’re hoping to get a young big man that you can cultivate.  He is a project in that he’s probably not going to help an NBA team immediately, but you’d like to have a young big kid like this on your roster and hope to develop him.

Q.  What do you make of the Harrison twins—Andrew and Aaron— and where their stock is at this stage?

FRASCHILLA:  It’s all over the board in the second round.  I think there’s more of a buzz about Andrew, I think because of the fact that teams think he can be a big point guard in the league.  The concern that teams have had about Aaron is his outside shooting.

They both have good size.  I’d be surprised if either player goes in the first round.  They’re both going to get an opportunity to make rosters next year, but things really haven’t changed much since the end of the season.

I do hear more buzz about Andrew’s draft prospects than I do Aaron’s at this point.

Q.  As you know, Kentucky has had a number of first‑round picks over the last few years, and I’m wondering how much of that you think is a developmental thing in particular with Kentucky. How much of it is a tribute to excellent recruiting— bringing in players who would be the type of draft pick wherever they went?

FRASCHILLA:  Well, I think John Calipari would tell you that it’s first and foremost about the recruiting, because he’s been able to do an incredible job since he arrived at recruiting the best players in the country.  That’s a given.  That’s a fact.  There’s no argument there.  But anybody who thinks that he hasn’t developed a lot of these guys then doesn’t realize how good a coach John is.

Each Kentucky team has seemed to have its own challenges in terms of John getting his individual players ready for the NBA.  This team was all about the platoon system, how he was going to keep everybody happy.  As it turns out, I think you’re going to see guys that were under the radar a little bit during their college careers as freshmen, particularly Lyles and Booker, end up being very good NBA players, in part because they were well thought of coming into college, highly ranked, and also because they spent a year practicing against some of the best players in the country and adhering to John’s coaching.

It’s definitely a little bit of both.

Q.  What can you tell us about Porzingis, and if he were to go to the Knicks at 4 how do you see him as a fit there?

FRASCHILLA:  Well, as a native New Yorker, you and I ‑‑ I know the fans will not be happy to see him walk across the stage, because there will be somebody that the Knicks haven’t drafted who’s played college basketball this year or the fans have at least heard about.  But if you’re picking 4, you’re essentially needing to roll the dice a little bit and gambling, and I don’t know how you could come up with a better gamble than a guy that’s 7’1″, on his way to 7’2″, who’s athletic, graceful, shoots the ball from three, blocks shots and is 19 years old.

So I would just say, I get the idea of the bust factor, but after Okafor, Towns and Russell are gone, you might as well gamble and draft a kid who potentially could be along the lines of a Dirk Nowitzki or a combination of Nowitzki, Gasol,or  Kirilenko.

He’s a graceful player, his English is great, he’s a basketball junkie.  There are some things about him that I think are going to translate well to the NBA.  The one thing he is not is a center.  He is not a center.  He is a power forward right now.

Q.  A New Yorker might jump back and say, ‘Oh, my God, is he Bargnani?’ What would you say to that?   

FRASCHILLA:  Well, Bargnani was a No. 1 pick in a, let’s face it, bad draft.  And Tommy will remember this, but those of us who studied Bargnani that year, there wasn’t really ‑‑ now, in retrospect there are probably guys that everybody missed on, but there was no clear No. 1 when Bargnani came out.  And you know, from a guy like me who studies the international players, I did not think Bargnani had any wow factor at all.  He just was going to be a good player, and he’s averaged 15 points a game in his career, by the way, but he’s not ‑‑ he certainly was not a guy that screamed automatic NBA star.

This kid is more athletic.  He can affect the game in different ways, unlike Bargnani, and there’s some bust factor there, there’s no question, because he’s going to have to get stronger.  But it’s hard to find these kind of tools in this kind of size.

Picking at 4, I actually think it’s a safe place for him, I really do.

[Penn joins the call]

TOM PENN:  I was in Memphis when we took Pau Gasol at 3, and this guy presents himself similarly.  I mean, Pau was string bean skinny with the same concerns.  Pau had a different skill set, but I watched the tape on Porzingis and the way he runs and finishes, he’s very similar, and he’s got a great work ethic the way Pau did.

FRASCHILLA:  Yeah, and I might add, if anybody is listening, with regard to Porzingis, the thing about Porzingis that Tom mentions, incredible work ethic, also well coached.  He left Latvia at 15.  He’s been well coached.  In fact, the guy who had the most influence on his playing career, a very famous Spanish coach by the name of A‑i‑t‑o.  When you have one name, you know you’re really good at something.  He’s the same guy who coached Pau at an early age, Navarro, Rubio.  He’s a magician with young players in the Spanish league, and this kid has been well coached.

Q.  Payne from Murray State, what are your thoughts about him?

FRASCHILLA:  I really like him.  Really like him.  I think D’Angelo Russell is the best point guard in the draft, but this kid, if you look at the history of the last 10 years or so in the NBA, high draft picks at that position, go down the list with going back to Chris Paul even and Kyrie Irving and Damian Lilliard and guys, Russell Westbrook, they tend to have an instant impact.

The other thing I like about this kid, and I’ll get into a little more detail, you know, small school point guard, kind of like Lilliard, kind of like George Hill.  He reminds me of a left‑handed George Hill in that he can really shoot the ball— terrific NBA system at Murray State.  They ran a lot of pick‑and‑roll for him.  He’s got really good court vision.  He’s only a sophomore, which tells me that there’s still more room for improvement.

Usually a kid from Murray State is a three‑ or four‑year guy, but this kid has had such a quick improvement in two years in college that he’s made a name for himself.  So I really like him.  He’s a great kid.  He’s got speed.  He can shoot it, really gets into the lane, can make plays for himself and others.  Really, I think, a good pick in that probably 9‑to‑14 range.  I’d be shocked if he slides past 14.  I think he’s in the Thunder’s wheelhouse right now.

Q.  I realize Nebraska Terran Petteway is not on most draft boards, but what have you heard about his workouts and what would it take for him to sneak in as possibly a late second rounder?

FRASCHILLA:  Well, I think the big thing with his workouts is that he shows people he can make shots because he was a volume shooter at Nebraska, almost by necessity, because he was the only guy that I can recall on Tim Miles’s team.  He wasn’t necessarily their best player every night, but he was the only guy that could get his own shot when he had to, which is a valuable skill, especially in college when plays break down all the time.

He can get his own shot, and then he’s got good size at that 2‑guard spot.  But inconsistent shooting, probably needs to be a better ball handler, as well, but I can’t tell you how the individual workouts have gone, but I would tell you that if he proves that he can make NBA threes particularly, then there is a possibility that he’s going to go in the mid‑to‑late second round because he’s a good athlete, he’s got good positional size.  But the inconsistency in his shooting over the course of his career is a concern to teams.

Q.  Fran, you started to mention this earlier, how the league is kind of leaning toward the small‑ball, position-less basketball. How much do you see that affecting how the Draft goes and how premiums are put on certain players? 

FRASCHILLA:  So the evolution of small ball, I think in part, because by necessity, because, you know, it’s funny, as a former college coach we always tried to put our best players on the floor regardless of position because oftentimes you have no choice.  And it seems to me the way the league has gone, and Tom will certainly have a valuable opinion here, but it seems to me that with the dearth of low‑post scoring in the league in years, you can count them on one hand or the most two, maybe seven or eight guys that can really score inside, the game has evolved to a faster, more wide‑open, spread game, because of the talent level, because of the influence of Mike D’Antoni to the league and bringing the European style here.  And also I think to get your best players on the floor, as was evidenced this year with I think the Warriors because they played small, but it was in order to play, I felt, their best players.  Tom, how do you feel about that?

PENN:  Well, it’s the spread it out, just whole notion of things.  Small is one way to do it, but the growth of the stretch 4 position, the power forward who can step away and shoot jump shots and pull the big man away from the basket the way Amar’e Stoudemire did with Phoenix.  That’s frankly the way the Miami Heat ended up playing with Chris Bosh pulling the bigs away from the basket.  It opens up driving lanes for the wings, and this was perfect for Golden State.  That was their style of play most of the year.

Bogut was critically important as a big man to get them through the bigs in the West, but the truth is had they bumped up against the Clippers or San Antonio, we might have had a different result on small ball because the Spurs could play smart power ball.

But you need a bad man in the backcourt or two.  I mean, you have to have star guards if you’re going to win in the NBA.  That’s why D’Angelo Russell is such an appealing prospect as high as 2.  He’s got superstar potential, and you need that.  It used to be unthinkable that you’d think of a combo guard ahead of a big man of the quality of Okafor or Towns, but in today’s NBA, you just need an unstoppable wing with the way that coaches are spreading the floor and opening up driving lanes.

Q.  I just want to know about the one‑and‑dones. Obviously with Towns, Okafor and Russell, they made the right call to enter the Draft, and Winslow, but what about some of the other guys?  How do you perceive their decisions to come out, especially a lot of the Kentucky guys?  And what are your thoughts on the one‑and‑done thing?  Has it been good for the NBA?  Has it been bad for college basketball?  How do you assess the rule so far in the last decade, I guess? 

FRASCHILLA:  Well, the way I look at this Draft, I think at least 15 of the 30 picks are going to end up being teenagers, and what that tells you, and we’ve seen it, is that not only is the league younger, but there’s more projection than ever before in the league.  You’re taking guys based on not where they are right now but where you hope they are in two or three years.

Now, it’s a little different at the top of the Draft, but I ask all my friends to think about ‑‑ I say this:  Name a rookie that played in the Playoffs in a meaningful role, and you can’t find them.  My point is that even though teams want to grab a hold of the talent as young as possible, in many cases because they see more upside, it’s going to be more projection, which means more mistakes, and also more guys that come into the league that are not ready to help a good team.

And so I think from that standpoint, it’s a baseball draft.  It’s taking guys that you know when you draft them are probably not going to be ready to help your team for a couple years, a guy that the Celtics took last year was a perfect example in James Young.  I think Kelly Oubre is a guy that has a chance to be very good in two or three years, and the team that drafts him in the teens is going to draft him expecting him not to help them for that length of time.

So I think ‑‑ I don’t know if it’s good for the league, it’s just a reality of where the league is right now that you want to grab talent, whether it’s ready or not.

PENN:  One‑and‑done is better than none‑and‑done for the NBA.  Two‑and‑done would be better.  The more time that NBA teams allow these guys to reveal themselves as to who they are both in their game and their character, the better.  So if you could get these guys at 20, it would be better for the NBA game.

As to the college game, I’m not sure what effect it has had.  I think whether it’s none‑and‑done or one‑and‑done, you’ve still got this idea of the best players not going to college or not being there very long.

The NBA doesn’t care that way, or the teams don’t.  The teams would just like to see a scenario where players have the opportunity to come in when they’re most ready to come in and can help, and it certainly does help if they develop their game and their brand in the college system and then come in as well‑known commodities, the way these guys do.

Q.  I wanted to ask about D’Angelo Russell. I think the term “potential superstar” has been thrown around a lot.  I’m curious as to your evaluation.  What’s the step he needs to take to reach that potential, and if there’s a knock on his game right now, what would that be?

FRASCHILLA:  I would think it would be physical maturity at this point.  He came to Ohio State not expecting to be a one‑and‑done guy.  He wasn’t highly thought of.  He was a top‑25 recruit, but I don’t think anybody really expected the kind of freshman year he had.  I think just the physical aspect of the game night in, night out as an NBA rookie, 82 games, one night guarding Russell Westbrook, the next night guarding Kyrie Irving, the next night guarding Chris Paul and on and on and on, so I think there’s going to be a mental adjustment for him.

Certainly the way point guards have adjusted, the talented point guards, have adjusted to the league, as I mentioned earlier, fairly quickly, I expect him to be a very good ‑‑ or have an impact as a rookie, but I also think there will be a learning curve for him.

I would just simply say he’s the best passer.  You know, maybe Ricky Rubio coming from Spain would be in the same category, but this kid is the best passer I’ve seen in a decade.

He throws passes to teammates who don’t even know they’re open, and that’s hard to do.

PENN:  And he can shoot the ball.  It’s a nice combination in today’s NBA.  He’s just a kid.  He’s just got to ripen up and mature, but he’s got major boom potential, superstar potential.  Here at ESPN we’ve got a very sophisticated advanced analytics group, and they put together a model on the best boom versus bust, best high‑risk, high‑reward type of player, which is really what the top of the Draft is about, high risk, high reward, and he’s got the highest ceiling, according to them.  He’s got the 15 percent chance to be an NBA superstar, which is that elite, rarest of talent.

He’s also got among the top 20 players in the Draft the highest bust potential because of concerns that his numbers are inflated based on the competition that he faced with the team that he was on.

I typically trust these analytics folks, and this is sometimes how advanced metrics come in.  If you’ve got the belief that some of these numbers make sense, you know, when you’re ranking highest risk, highest reward, he’s right there.

You’ve got to swing for the fences a little bit here because if you hit it, it’s a game changer, it’s a franchise changer, and he has tremendous potential to have that happen.

Q.  How do you rank the top perimeter shooters in this Draft? Who are your top three?

FRASCHILLA:  Yeah, you know, I try to talk to my NBA friends all the time about this, because I see way more college games than I get a chance to see NBA games live and in person, and I kind of realize how big the gap is between an ACC game and a Western Conference game.

I would say I’m bullish on Hezonja for sure, his effective field goal percentage on spot‑up jump shots this year was 65 percent, which is outrageous, and he’s got deep range, and he’s got a quick release.  He was 8‑for‑8 from an ACB game this year, so I would say he jumps out at me right away.

Certainly Devin Booker has been talked about as a young guard at that spot with potential to be a good shooter.  He struggled late in the year, but he’s the youngest guy in the draft and he’s got that positional size.

Kaminsky, we’ll see if that deep shooting translates to the NBA because he was such a good shooter at Wisconsin.

You’d have to throw Porzingis in there based on what we’ve seen here recently.  So those guys come to mind right away, and not having a list in front of me, Cameron Payne is an awful good shooter for a point guard.  Another guy that I think about, you know, that’s going to be in the top half of the Draft.  If there’s anybody that you have on your mind you want to ask me about, it might jog my memory.

PENN:  Well, he gave the great list.  The truth is the further you go in the Draft, the more you get into playoff teams that need specialists, and shooting is the number one specialty that everybody needs.  So those guys can play their way into a rotation because they can toe the line and knock down shots and space the floor, especially on the heels of the success of Golden State.  If you can get a shooter at any time, you go get him.  It’ll be interesting to see who surfaces.

[Penn leaves call for a moment, SportsCenter segment]

FRASCHILLA:  That’s why you heard so much about Pat Connaughton.  I think when we did our Combine board back in May I had him 32nd, and that’s a kid with positional size who can also shoot it.

He appears to be as athletic as the Combine results showed.  You know, I would think of Connaughton as one of those specialists that a team is going to grab probably in the second round.

Q.  How much of a dilemma do you think the Lakers are facing if they’re really looking at Okafor veruss Russell with all the things you guys have pointed out about Russell? And what’s your opinion of the two UCLA kids, Powell and Looney, and what kind of impact do you think they can have? 

FRASCHILLA:  Well, let’s go to UCLA kids first.  Kevon Looney is a project.  There’s a number of guys in this draft like him, a young big man, in this case a power forward who is not going to play ‑‑ in my opinion, not going to play major minutes for a team early in his career, and that’s okay because the further he slides in the first round, the more likely he’s going to end up on a team that’s already pretty good, a playoff team that can nurture him.

I think what I like about him, rebounding instincts for sure.  There is some possibility of him being able to be a pick‑and‑pop guy down the road.  I was a little surprised he came out early, but he did, and so we’re talking about potential, strictly potential, and a big kid you want to have on your roster.  But he’s going to be a work in progress.

Norman Powell, terrific athlete, could be a defensive stopper, second‑round pick.  Had his best year of his career this year when it mattered most, an NBA athlete, can guard the 1 and the 2.  Outside shooting will be a question mark, but he’s going to try to fight for a role on a team as a defensive stopper at first.

You know, the dilemma at No. 2 is interesting because as Tommy said, although the league has gone smaller, you want to swing for the fences, and I think it’s going to be awfully hard to pass up on Jahlil Okafor.  Given that Towns came sort of out of nowhere this year and is likely to end up being the No. 1 pick, in Okafor you’re talking about a guy that shot 66 percent from the field, had one of the best freshman years in recent years.  When he’s not double‑teamed in the NBA every single night, I think he’s going to be a terrific low‑post scorer.

The Lakers do have a dilemma, but it’s a good dilemma as opposed to not being happy with whoever is there.  They have their choice of two or three guys that could turn out to be grand slams.  It’s a good problem to have if you’re them.

Q.  I know this is probably a difficult question considering the Pelicans don’t pick until No. 56, but they talked about drafting a foreign player, and I was wondering if there were any guys that you think are really good that may slide that far down in the draft.

FRASCHILLA:  You came to the right place.  There definitely will be.  It is not a great foreign draft, quite frankly, outside of the top three that are going to go in the top eight.  It’s not a great year for international players, but there’s definitely going to be some guys ‑‑ and I hesitate to say who they would be.  They would just be names on a dartboard, but the idea with the 56th pick is taking a guy ‑‑ unless you fall in love with a college guy, and that’s doubtful that far down the Draft, but with the 56th pick you’re looking to take a guy, a young international guy, that you don’t have to bring him over right away.  You can leave him in Europe to percolate a little bit, and oftentimes it’s a big guy.

But I can throw names at you from now until the cows come home, but there will be guys.  There will be a couple guys there in the late 50s that the Pelicans will look at and say, here’s a foreign kid we can draft and keep an eye on for the next two or three years.

Q.  LeBron’s agent, Rich Paul, has two clients in the draft, Lyles from Kentucky and Harrell from Louisville. I’m just curious on your thoughts for both players, what do you see for them Thursday and then as pros. 

FRASCHILLA:  Well, I think I love Trey Lyles.  I think the fact that you’re not hearing much buzz about him, you’re not hearing anybody say, “sources are saying about Trey Lyles,” means that there are some teams that really like him, and I think his range right now is 9 through 14.  And I do know for a fact that there are teams that like him because when you look at him coming out of high school, he was considered one of the best power forwards in the class of whatever it is, ’14, I guess, but he played out of position this year at small forward, which is what he is not and likely never will be.  But at 6’10” with good size, he’s young, he’s sturdy, he’s got an NBA body, he’s got some ability to make shots from the perimeter, although the field‑goal percentage was not good, I think that he’s a guy that ‑‑ not necessarily slipping through anybody’s cracks but is going to end up being a good NBA player, and probably suffered a little bit being lost in the shuffle.

And then with Montrezl Harrell, you’re looking at the classic undersized, high‑energy, low‑skill inside player that is probably going to go in the late first round and be an energy guy, and he can make his mark in the league because he’s a terrific rebounder and he plays hard.

He would want to fashion his game after Kenneth Faried, which is what the comparison has been since he arrived at Kentucky.

Both of those guys I think are in the first round, and the future bodes well for both of them.

Q.  Fran, where do you think Branden Dawson and Travis Trice will end up in the Draft, and how do you view them as players?

FRASCHILLA:  Well, it wouldn’t shock me if they both go undrafted honestly, but it only takes one team to really like either guy in the second round.  Travis ‑‑ both of those guys finished their careers strongly, needless to say.  Branden unfortunately is in that tweener mode as a player, and he always has been at Michigan State.  He’s played like a 4 man but he’s built like a 3, and you can’t really compare him to Draymond because I’m not sure if Branden made a three in his career at Michigan State.

He’s going to just have to fight for his life figuratively, because he is athletic, and he’s going to have to find a niche, maybe as a defensive stopper.

Travis is interesting because while he’ll either be a mid‑to‑late second‑round pick or undrafted, he’s going to have a realistic chance of actually making a team because he’s going to be on a Summer League roster, and it’s really important to have a good, solid point guard on your Summer League roster with which to run the coach’s offense and get the No. 1 pick shots, if you know what I mean.  He’s going to get looked at closely, and given that every team carries three point guards, that’s 45 point guards in the NBA.

There’s a realistic chance that he’ll definitely be on a Summer League team and then he’s got to kind of fight from there.  But it wouldn’t shock me because I thought he played really well when he was healthy the second half of his senior year.

Q.  I was hoping to get your thoughts on Josh Richardson. Chad Ford referenced the significant buzz about him.  He was a guy who wasn’t invited to the Combine and now you’ll find him around the 45‑ish range on some of the mock drafts.  What went into this buzz and how is he helping himself and what are your thoughts on his chances as an NBA player?  

FRASCHILLA:  Well, the first thing that jumps out at you when you talk about Josh is gradual improvement every single year at Tennessee, and then his senior year, he has to, through no fault of his own, become the Vols’ point guard, which I thought he handled the situation very well, and he’s going to end up being more of a 2 than a 1.  He improved his outside shooting, but because of his size and the fact that he has always hung his hat on being a very good defensive player in the backcourt, that’s where you’re going to see Josh.  That’s going to be his best opportunity to make a team is going to be as a wing defender who can play some point and has the potential to become a good NBA three‑point shooter.

It’s not there yet, but when you look at this Draft and you’re looking at a guy like him who’s been productive over his career, he’s a safe, mid‑second‑round pick because he’s got the things you’re looking for:  Size, athleticism, and one discernible NBA skill, which I think will come on the defensive end.

Q.  Do you get a feel for what Josh Richardson done in his workouts or what he’s done to kind of increase his draft stock, or is it just more people actually getting the chance to see him in person that has helped him out?

FRASCHILLA:  One of the things that helps a guy like Josh is when he goes in and works out against players who are perceived to be picked higher in the Draft, so for example, if he’s gone into a workout and worked out against a guy that a team is thinking about taking in the lottery, it’s a perfect opportunity for him to make his mark, especially defensively.  And having a junkyard dog mentality, which he did have at Tennessee throughout his career.

I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s had good workouts and impressed teams on the defensive end because of that size and athleticism.

Q.  Fran, two years ago you and I both saw a guy at Oklahoma who had a pretty decent offensive game in Romero Osby and I think Orlando took a flier on him in the middle‑late stages of Round 2. I’m wondering if you think TaShawn Thomas could sneak into that same position, another OU guy, on Thursday night? 

FRASCHILLA:  It’s possible.  I watched TaShawn work out in Las Vegas a couple weeks ago, and it’s interesting, he’s very similar to the kind of players that Lon Kruger has had at Oklahoma at the power forward spot since he got there, Amath M’Baye, who will be back with the Clippers this summer, Ro Osby, who will be on somebody’s Summer League team.  I think TaShawn is definitely going to be on somebody’s Summer League roster, and he’s versatile enough maybe to impress somebody.  I don’t think it’s a given that he’s going to be drafted in the second round, but he’s definitely going to get a chance to prove himself, and he’s had overall a very good college career.  Teams have seen him a lot, both at Houston and Oklahoma.

His best bet is if he’s drafted, it’ll be terrific.  If he’s not drafted, he’s going to be fighting and scratching in Las Vegas or in Orlando or Utah at the various summer leagues.

But high character, productive career, somewhat of a tweener for the size that he needs to be to be either a 3 or a 4 in the league, and that’s where he is right now.

Q.  I have a question about Mouhammadou Jaiteh, the French player, power forward. You saw him at the NBA Combine.  What can he bring to an NBA team and can he fit the NBA style? 

FRASCHILLA:  I’ve watched “Mom” now for three years, and what I like about “Mom” is how much improvement he has made.  When he came to the Nike Hoops Summit in 2013, he was not particularly impressive, although he was 18 years old.  He was not in great shape.  So there was no real draft buzz about him back then.

He has significantly improved.  He has changed his body.  He is still a 20‑year old 6’11” youngster that has had a good, productive season obviously in French Pro A.  He’s moving better.  He’s running better.  He’s developing some semblance of a low‑post game.  I understand that he would like to come over immediately.

The reality is that he’ll likely be taken ‑‑ he’s probably going to go in the early second round, unless a team at the end of the first round is in a salary‑cap bind and decides they’re going to take a chance on him late in the first round and leave him in France.

But for a 20‑year‑old with the improvement he’s made, if I were a team, from 25 to 40, I would want to have “Mom” Jaiteh’s rights because there is a chance in a couple of years he could be an effective, at least backup center in the NBA.

[Penn returns to the call]

Q.  Tom, can you speak to the draft‑and‑stash issue?

PENN:  Yeah, there’s a smart strategy with NBA teams to draft talent like we’re describing in the second round and then allow that player to continue to develop overseas.  And you retain the rights to the foreign player because he’s under contract and willing to continue to earn a living and develop, really on someone else’s dime.

And so when that player is then ready to come over, he’s immediate help as opposed to being a young development project.

So with the trajectory that Fran just described and with this improvement, 6’11” frame and everything that goes with it, you can clearly see him as a great draft‑and‑develop‑overseas kind of candidate.

Q.  When you watch a player like Mario Hezonja, does he have stardom written all over him?

FRASCHILLA:  I see stardom with, what we say in America, with an asterisk.  If his maturity level increases, and he is a very volatile, mercurial player because he is so intense and he has so much pride, if he comes over to the NBA, allows himself to be coached, I think he has, at the very worst, NBA starter talent, and then stardom will go from there.  But initially right now there’s no question the talent is NBA starter talent.

I expect him to be ‑‑ if it’s a good fit in this draft, I expect him to be a very good NBA shooting guard.  He’s the only player in the draft that could win both the Dunk Contest and the Three‑Point Contest, realistically.

Q.  There’s a lot of talk, of course, about analytics and workouts for teams, and I’m wondering how that impacts teams’ decisions on players, as opposed to actual game performances on the college level.

FRASCHILLA:  Very much depends on which organization you talk to.  Now virtually every single organization involves analytics in the decision‑making process.  It’s some sort of factor for everyone.  On the low end you have some teams that do it just as window dressing to show their owner that they do it, and then on the other end you’ve got some that really rely on numbers.

In my opinion the appropriate place is the numbers are able to validate and verify what you see and hear, so your eyes ‑‑ the player has to pass the eye test first based on his performance and what you see and how you evaluate him from a basketball perspective.  What the numbers will do is either validate what you’ve seen and what you’ve heard about him or cause you to question what you thought you saw.  So it’s not unusual to have the analytics say he’s not nearly as good as you think, and here’s why, that causes you to go back and say, whoa, I think I was wrong.

And by the same token, you might write a guy off, and your analytics guy will come to you and say, I think you’re wrong, take another look at this guy because, and he gives you the data, and you go, huh, you know what, I was wrong.

[Fraschilla leaves call]

Q.  Tom, does anybody come to mind in either one of those categories as somebody that wasn’t viewed as much of a prospect but their numbers convinced a team otherwise and he turned out to be really good or vice versa.

PENN:  Brandon Roy analytically started out spectacularly that we ended up valuing.  So that was one that caused you to take a closer look at the exceptional ceiling he had, and he was one of these four‑year guys from Washington, right, where everybody was ‑‑ in this day and age you can’t have a four‑year player who could be a star, so that comes to mind.

You know, I’m thinking back to some mistakes made in the early part of my career that I was associated with, and I think if we had a more sophisticated analytics department we might have looked at some of these high picks differently.

But that’s ever‑evolving.  The data avalanche is on, and the real key now is just figuring out what to do with all this data.  We now have cameras tracking every single move of every player and the ball at all times and exactly where they are, and the real key is what you do with that.

It’s a fun part of the job, but it can be ‑‑ nothing trumps what you see with your eyes.

Q.  Tom, I was wondering, should the Pistons consider moving up in the draft for a better player, and which player should that be for if they were to move up?

PENN:  Yeah, well, everybody today wants to move up.  Nobody wants to move back, everybody wants to move up, so yes, they should consider moving up.  They need a star player.  It was a big blow last year when they lost that draft pick via the bounce of the lottery balls, and they need more youth, more talent.  I’d love to see them get a wing player.  If they could go up and get a star like D’Angelo Russell, a potential star, somebody like that, or an outstanding backcourt player, it would be great.

That’s easier said than done.  They’ve got the big man in the middle to build around.  They have to decide what to do with Monroe, whether to retain him or not, and they need talent at all levels.

They should draft where they are and/or bump up if they can.

Q.  Tom, I wanted to ask about the New Orleans Pelicans; they have the No. 56 pick and obviously you might not get a whole lot at No. 56, but what do you think they should do? Should they just draft a foreign player and try to keep him over there? 

PENN:  The 56th pick, oh, my goodness.  We drafted Patty Mills at 55 one year, and he ends up being a key role player on the Spurs’ championship team, so you can find talent back in the late 50s.  You’re going to see the opportunity to take a player and stash him overseas.  That happens a lot.  Then you’re just playing the futures game.  That’s when it gets really coach‑specific, right?  That’s when you say, Coach, what do you want.  We’re going to have a minimum salary guy.  Let’s give you whoever you want for whoever reason and we’ll take a swing on it.

So that’s one where if they’re smart, they’re going to say, Alvin Gentry, what do you want, let’s deliver it for you.  That’s a good way to build trust with your coach right away.

Q.  How did you get lucky with Patty Mills? Was it just luck?

PENN:  Well, that particular year, he had come off a big World Championships or Olympics with Australia, so that’s what appealed to us.  Then he broke his foot after we drafted him.  He actually fractured his foot and missed most of his rookie year.  It took a couple years, but the Spurs were smart.  They got him at the right time and made the most of it.  That’s what they do.

-30-

Media contact: Gianina Thompson at gianina.thompson@espn.com (@Gianina_ESPN)

Transcript: ESPN 2015 NBA Draft Media Call with Jay Bilas

Transcript: ESPN 2015 NBA Draft Media Call with Jay Bilas

This afternoon, we had ESPN college basketball analyst and NBA Draft expert Jay Bilas on a media call to discuss the 2015 NBA Draft, which will be exclusively televised on ESPN for the 13th consecutive year. During the telecast, Bilas will be on site at Barclays Center in Brooklyn, N.Y. alongside host Rece Davis, college basketball analyst Jay Williams and NBA analyst Jalen Rose.

Audio Replay: Click here

More details on ESPN NBA Draft Coverage: Click here

Q.  Would you take a chance on Chris Walker (University of Florida) in the second round?

JAY BILAS:  I think it could happen because of his size, athleticism and strength, but the one caveat to that, is after he came out of high school and played in Florida, it’s pretty clear that he’s got a long way to go in knowing how to play.  He is behind.  So I would be very surprised if he were drafted.  He fits the suit athletically and body‑style‑wise, but he’s not demonstrated that he knows how to play and has the skill level necessary to make the jump.

He’s still a project, and I think he’s somebody that you could see bringing in as a free agent, but I would be surprised if he were drafted.

Q.  What do you think of Frank Kaminsky (University of Wisconsin)?

BILAS:  Well, I think Frank is going to improve.  The issue is when you compare him to players who are freshmen and they have a longer way to go in improvement, and that’s where I sometimes struggle, and I think other people do too.  Just the idea, if you look at where Frank was as a freshman, and where Kelly Oubre is as a freshman or Trey Lyles, you would say, well, heck those two were better as freshmen than Frank was, well, so what, Frank is a late bloomer, he’s bloomed.  Years ago when a 22‑year‑old came into the league, nobody said, ‘Well, that’s it.  That is the ceiling, he can’t get any better.’

Of course Frank can get better and I think he will get better.  He’ll get stronger.  He’ll find his game even more than it is now.  But what Frank Kaminsky is right now is more than good enough.  And that’s sort of the issue is with anybody you’re betting on their potential, there is a chance they’re not going to reach it.  Frank has reached a very good level of potential, and I still think he’s going to get better.  But he’s a top 10 pick because of who he is, not who he’s going to be.  Others are top 10 picks because of who they’re going to be.  I hope that makes sense, and I explained it right.

Q.  What do you think the hesitation on Myles Turner (University of Texas) is?

BILAS:  My only hesitation with Myles Turner, I’m a fan of his ability level.  He’s a great kid, and that’s one of the things just to go off topic a little bit about this draft that I find most compelling is this is an unbelievably high‑character draft, I mean, we’re talking about nothing but really good guys.  Stars in the NBA right now for the most part are really good guys.  The NBA is a great place with that.  But this draft has good guy after good guy after good guy.  You find yourself saying what a great kid over and over again.  And I think that is going to extend a lot of their careers beyond their ability would put them.

I’m a big fan of his skill level and his length.  I think he’s a good athlete.  There are questions about how he changes ends and moves laterally and runs, and I’ve got those concerns.  One of the concerns I have with Turner is his best performances were against the worst teams that Texas played, and I’ve done all the numbers on it.  His numbers drop precipitously when you put him against teams that were over .500 in BCS conferences and in non‑BCS conference teams.

I mean, his numbers are great against non‑BCS conference teams.  They drop against BCS conference teams, and they drop even further against BCS conference teams that are over .500.

Q.  What top‑notch college shooters might be around at the end of the first round?

BILAS:  Geez, I’d have to go into, like I actually put this stuff down by specialty and category, and I don’t have it in front of me right now.  I didn’t anticipate that kind of question.  But, like I think Devin Booker and Frank Kaminsky, actually, are the two best shooters in the draft.  But there are a number of other guys that can make shots.  I don’t think this is a draft, honestly, that is full of great shooters.  There are several guys that are good shooters, but it’s not a long list of guys that I would say are knockdown great shooters.  But there is shooting available, if that’s what you’re interested in.

But as you get down toward the end of the first round, I’m not sure I’d say anybody sticks out just because of his shooting.

Let me think about that one a little bit more.  There is nobody that comes to mind.  I have Booker as the top shooter in the draft, and Frank Kaminsky as the top‑shooting big guy, right along with Kristaps Porzingis.  He can really shoot it, but he’s not going to be around.  None of those guys are going to be around past the lottery.

Q.  What are your thoughts on Michael Frazier (University of Florida) as a draft prospect? How much did he help himself in the Combine? How do you think teams will weigh that versus the college career that he has? 

BILAS:  Michael Frazier as a shooter, he’s one of the better shooters in the draft.  But I see him as a second‑round pick.  And I think I’ve got him slotted right around 40 on my best available list.  So I would put him there.

Michael’s got size, and he’s got a high release on his shot, and he’s a very good shooter.  I’m not sure I wrote classify him as a great shooter, but he’s a very good shooter, and he does a good job running off screens.  He sets his feet really well, and his size sets him apart and makes him a more attractive prospect.

I think as a second rounder, to have a guy, I think at least I’d wind up moving guys up, and Michael is one of those that’s higher.  There are other guys that are probably better overall players, but the fact that he’s got this specialist type skill in shooting puts him higher as a result of it.  And I would do the same thing with a guy who is a lockdown defender or maybe like Alan Williams from UC Santa Barbara who is a great rebounder.  He’s maybe not as good of an overall player, somebody else all‑around, but that one special skill puts him above some other guys.

Q.  What are your thoughts on Emmanuel Mudiay? What do you think of his decision not to play college ball in the States and how that may or may not affect his draft stock?

BILAS:  Yeah, I don’t think his decision to play in China will hurt him at all.  In fact, I think it overall will help him a little bit.  He didn’t have a choice.  He couldn’t play college basketball last year, so he had to do something else.

So I think he’s an outstanding prospect, top five good.  We may look back on this draft as we have with others and say, hey, he was better than some of the big guys.  He was better than this, better than that.  But he’s a top five talent.  With his size, his explosiveness, his ability to get into the lane and finish plays.  He’s a good distributor, and he has the potential to be an excellent defender.  He’s a very good defender that can be excellent in the NBA.

He spent the year playing with a 24‑second clock, working out all day every day overseas.

And when he got into the playoffs, he performed, after being injured, he performed at a very high level during his time ‑‑ his team’s time in the playoffs.  So I don’t have one bit of hesitation with mood yea as a prospect.

It’s just a question of do you think D’Angelo Russell of Ohio State may be a little better, or as I do, do you have Karl‑Anthony Towns or Jahlil Okafor over him?  I actually have Mudiay, Winslow and Russell ahead of Porzingis, which not a lot of people have which puts me on an island.  I’m not sure if I’m right or wrong, but that’s sort of my judgment.

Q.  What are your thoughts on guys like Rakeem Christmas (Syracuse University) and Chris McCullough (Syracuse University)?

BILAS:  Well, Rakeem Christmas, I think is a potential late first round pick.  He could be one of the first few picks of the first round.  I anticipate him going in the second round, high in the second round.  You know what you’re getting.  He’s mature, and he’s ready to step in and play right away.  I think he’s going to be able to perform man‑to‑man defense.  He played zone his whole college career, which is always a question with Syracuse guys.

It’s just the way it is.  They play zone in games and they play man a lot in practice.  But Christmas had a great year.  He improved his post moves.  He’s a rim protector, a good rebounder, he’s long.  He’s not the tallest guy as a five.  But he runs the floor, and I think he performed at a really high level in the Combine and opened a lot of eyes even further that had been opened during the season.  So I like him a lot.  I think he’s a valuable pick in the early second round.

McCullough is an interesting question.  He started off the season very well against some lesser teams that Syracuse played and then got hurt.  I think he played 16 games, if I remember right.  But the early games against lesser teams are what propped him up generally.

He’s got ability.  I tend to think that coming out is kind of a mixed bag, and they’re going to rightly feel like we don’t know.  And you have others that say, no, what we saw, if his knee is round, he’s got some potential and some area to improve.  A late first round pick or an early second‑round pick, let him mature; stick him in the D‑League for a while, all that kind of thing could be really beneficial down the road.

But you’re betting on his future.  But in today’s game it’s really difficult for prospects to ascertain the exact right thing to do in a given situation.  Some guys come back and they don’t get any better, and they feel like their draft stock drops as a result of it.

I happen to believe that you should come out early, in McCullough’s situation, if you are ready to be a pro.  If you’ve had enough and you’re ready to move on, that’s fine.  There is nothing wrong with that, or if you’re ready to be an immediate impact player.

But the third one is if you think you may be a fraud and your value is going to go down, and you want to realize high value before you get found out ‑‑ and I don’t mean that in McCullough’s case, but that’s a good reason for somebody to go too ‑‑ there is nothing wrong with that.  But absent that, I think you should only go when you’re ready.

Q.  How do you weigh actual performance in college games analyzing a player versus analytics, workouts, drills and other ways that people look at players?

BILAS:  Well, they’re all related.  I think it’s all part of one big picture that you get of a player.  So you don’t want to ‑‑ I think you have to have a balance on all of it.  I’m not as big a believer in workouts because I’ve watched people workout before and was blown away by them, and they didn’t turn out to be as good as I thought they would be.  Maybe I put too much into a workout and was wowed by it.  Then there are other times when I saw somebody workout and I didn’t think they were as good in a workout or as skilled.  Then you put them in a five‑on‑five game and their athleticism trumped their lack of skill which was a detriment to how they looked in a workout.

So I think it cuts both ways.  I just think you have to be really careful with it.  Look, everybody who has, and it doesn’t mean draft, and the quote/unquote draft analysts or other media member writer, radio guy or front office person or a fan, if you’ve put your opinion out on a player, on a bunch of players overtime, you’re going to be wrong on some.  I think you have to accept that consequence and hopefully learn from it and learn how your valuation judgment works and try to file those things away and make sure that you get the most information so that you can make the best possible decision.  But you better come to grips with you could be wrong, because you’re going to be wrong once in a while.  You just try to limit it.

Just on the workout thing, I’ve made the analogy and others have too ‑‑ heck, I’ve done this a lot just in my enjoyment of golf.  You look at somebody on the range, and you may think they’re one thing.  You get them out on the course, and they’re totally different.  And that cuts both ways too.  That’s kind of the way I factor in workouts.  It’s not as meaningful as you think.

Q.  What do you think of the impact that one‑and‑dones have had on the NBA and on college basketball since the rule was passed?

BILAS:  Well, I mean, look, if the NBA having a player in school longer is better for the NBA, because they’ve got a more mature player that is coming in that is more likely to give immediate help, because that is what the draft used to be about is getting immediate help.

It’s not about that anymore.  Now it’s about assets that could be future help and sort of putting assets together that may help now, may help later.  It’s more about assessing potential in compiling assets.  That’s a change.

College basketball, the longer any player stays, the better it is for college basketball.  There is no question about that.  The problem that I see is sort of this mentality that you’ve got to keep them out altogether.  And I don’t find that ‑‑ I find it in one part kind of elitist and in another you find it it’s a standard that’s not applied to any other person in college.

There is nobody else that you say, hey, you know, the student is told when you come here, if you’re only going to come here for a short period of time we don’t want you at all, let’s keep them out.  I think we should, as a ‑‑ I shouldn’t speak for college ‑‑ but if you believe in education like I do, I think we should encourage all people to go to college and for as long as they can.  I think one year of college is better than none, and two is better than one, and so forth.

So I’m not going to look at this one‑and‑done label as a negative.  And I don’t look at somebody going to college for a year as being a bad thing.

People like to say they’re making a mockery of education.  Well, no.  If a school doesn’t educate a person for whatever time that they’re in school, then the school’s the one that’s making a mockery of things.  If they don’t have standards to meet, then it’s the school that’s making a mockery of it.  Nobody can make a mockery of any school unless the school allows it.  So I don’t buy any of that.

Q.  Some of the one‑and‑dones, besides the top six seven picks, are they taking too big of a risk? Should most of these guys have gone back to school?

BILAS:  It differs with each prospect.  I think you mentioned Oubre and Turner, but you could go with Trey Lyles and some others.  There are a whole bunch of players that could have come back.  I do think it cuts both ways.

It depends on what the goal is.  If the goal is to be drafted high, then it’s one set of variables for the decision.  If the goal is what is best for a long and productive career, then there may be other variables that come into play.  What I think needs to be addressed or factors in by people is there is sort of an old‑school mentality.  Players used to stay for four years, everybody did.

But now there have been a lot of players that have decided to stay over the last several years whose stock has gone down, and they blame the fact that they came back.  So it cuts both ways on that stuff.  I think I mentioned before, as long as the player is making an informed decision about what he’s getting into and the reasons and he’s comfortable with the reasons he’s doing it, I’m okay with it.  I’m fine with it.

The problem I have is that too many times there are uninformed decisions being made, and I see mistakes being made there or what I would consider a mistake.  Some people at the time you say, hey, this guy’s making a mistake, and it works out great.  Other people leave early and say, no, that’s a good decision, and it doesn’t work out so great.

Let me give you an example of that.  Tyus Jones from Duke.  You will hear a lot of people say he’s got to go.  His stock is never going to be higher.  He’s got to go.  He doesn’t have a choice.  Well, yeah, he does have a choice.  Maybe he wants to come back to improve his game because he thinks it will be better for his long‑term career, or maybe his goal is, nope, I want to get as drafted as high as I can, and I’m never going to be drafted higher than now.

Those are all fair points and fair reasons upon which to base a decision.  It depends on what Tyus Jones wants.  If he’s comfortable with what he wants and he’s comfortable with the information that he’s received in making his decision an informed one, then I’m good with it.

Q.  I was wondering how deep this draft really is. The Cavaliers have the 24th pick in the first round.  Can they get a quality player there? 

BILAS:  Yeah, I think it’s a really deep draft.  It’s a really talented draft.  There are just so many close calls.  I don’t mind telling you that I’ve struggled with where to slot guys, and I have ‑‑ when you have discussions with players you make a judgment on a player.

I’ve spoken with my colleagues on it, and they have a different judgment.  I wouldn’t spend a whole lot of time trying to talk them out of it, because I do think there are a lot of really, really close calls in this draft.  There are a lot of calls I’m making that I’m second‑guessing as I’m even telling you about it.

So I think that’s the good thing, and it’s going to make this draft a heck of a lot of fun.  Like it may not be fun for somebody sitting there waiting to get drafted.  But for people who have watched these guys play and have an interest, there is an awful lot to discuss, digest, and differ on.

I would love to jump in a DeLorean and go to 2025 and be able to look back on what we’re saying right now and see who is right and who is wrong and the areas where I’m right and wrong because I think it’s going to be fascinating how this plays out not only on the draft, but after the draft.  This is one of the most fun drafts I can rib to talk about and to assess.  I’m as excited about this draft.

My first draft was the LeBron draft.  Man, was I excited about that one.  I’m excited about this one for different reasons.  But I’m equally excited about that, and that kind of makes me happy in doing my job.

Q.  Are there any names at 24 that you could throw out that are possibilities?

BILAS:  Yeah, I mean, around that range, the guy I happen to like the best is Justin Anderson of Virginia because I think he’s a top 20 talent.  But there are players like him that we could look back on later on and say why wasn’t he drafted higher?  Then you could also look back and say why was he taken this there?

But I happen to think we’re going to look back on Justin Anderson and ask why he wasn’t taken higher.

Q.  I was wondering if you could maybe compare the overall talent level in this class for maybe the last five or ten years? How good is this group?

BILAS:  That’s a good question.  I’m probably not very good at doing some of the comparison in a meaningful way.  I mean, it’s got the feel of being as talented as I can remember, overall.  It doesn’t have a LeBron‑type player so there is not a no‑brainer.  Even though some people saying Karl‑Anthony Towns at number one is a no‑brainer.  He may be.

You know, I happen to differ and think that there is a pretty good discussion to be had, not only with other big guys, but with guards too, as to who is going to be the best player out of this draft long‑term.  But it has the feel to me of being as deep and as good of a draft overall with the number of players, the style of players.

We’ve got a bunch of big guys.  We’ve got a bunch of wings.  We don’t have quite as many point guards in this one, but I’d put this draft up against any of the last five.

Q.  What are your thoughts on Branden Dawson (Michigan State)? Michigan State has produced a lot of guys that have gone to the second round lately, and that’s where I see him.  Where do you think he might end up on draft night? 

BILAS:  I think Branden’s a second‑round player.  He’s an extraordinary athlete and big‑time rebounder.  He’s undersized, and he doesn’t shoot the ball, and that’s a little bit of a concern.  But he can defend.

I believe he’s hard‑nosed.  He does have some issues and questions about how long he sustained high‑level effort, because when he puts high level effort out there, he’s a beast.  I happen to really like him.  I’ve got him in the 40s, late 40s, I think, if I remember right.  But he’s a middle second round player for me.

But I’m a big fan of his and always have been.  But skill level, his ability to put the ball on the floor and operate as a guard and to defend as a guard for long stretches, you know, those is reasonable questions.  But he can play in the NBA, and I think he will play in the NBA.

Q.  When it comes to the one‑and‑done kid versus the kid that stays in school for four years and develops, are there two guys at more opposite ends of the spectrum than Chris McCullough and Rakeem Christmas? Would you have even thought Christmas would be a potential first round pick at the end of his freshman year?

BILAS:  At the end of his freshman year, I would have. I would not have foreclosed that you may have said, hey, this guy isn’t going pro.  I mean, that won be a good decision.  But that’s why for him coming back and continuing to mature and play hard and get better has worked out extraordinarily well.  He’s put himself in a wonderful position to have a really good pro career.

McCullough is better earlier, but it’s kind of like what I was saying before about Frank Kaminsky.  You could argue based upon like sort of today’s game that Rakeem Christmas is a late bloomer.  But he’s bloomed.  Now Chris McCullough, you could say, well, he’s ahead of where Rakeem was as a freshman, but he hasn’t bloomed yet.

So we’re asking whether he’s going to bloom, and how brightly he’s going to bloom, and we don’t know the answer to that.

We have beliefs.  I think he’s got a chance.  But you really do know what you’re getting with Rakeem Christmas.  With Chris, you’re rolling the dice a little bit, and that’s why that decision, if you’re comparing the two or considering the two, that’s why that kind of decision is so difficult.

Q.  What is your analysis of Treveon Graham (Virginia Commonwealth University) and Marcus Thornton (College of William & Mary) who obviously opened some eyes at the Combine?

BILAS:  I had a chance to work with Treveon at the Nike Skills Academy last summer, and I was really impressed with him.  He’s one great kid and plays his tail off.  He’s not a superior athlete, and he’s not the most talented.  But he works his tail off and he’s very productive in his minutes out there.  He can make perimeter shots.  He’s not a great shooter.  He’s not the most skilled guy, but his motor revs high.  I’ve got him as a late second round pick and I like him very much.

Marcus has got ability.  He’s got quickness, and he’s very good with the ball.  He’s not afraid of anybody.  He operates very well in the open court and he’ll defend.  I happen to have him a little further down, so I’ve got him just outside of the second round.  That doesn’t mean he’s not going to get drafted and that doesn’t mean he’s not going to play in the NBA.  I like him very much.  What a guy that when he plays he’s pure of heart, if that makes sense.

I really enjoyed watching him play.  After I watched him I was kind of kicking myself going why haven’t I been watching this guy more?  He’s a joy to watch.  I was heart sick for him when his team didn’t finish the job.  But, man, I like him a lot.

Q.  I’ve got a question about the Thunder and what you anticipate them doing on Draft night at 14, given the state of their roster and their team needs?

BILAS:  I don’t know what they’re going to do.  That’s one of the good parts about my job is the way I do the draft is I’m not worried about where a guy’s going to get taken.  I’m worried about where I sort of where I rank them and then discuss who he is and what he can bring and all that stuff.

The reason I try to do it that way is so I don’t get bogged down in team needs versus best available player, things like that.  I mean, I tend to think, first of all, Sam Presti is as smart as it gets.  And my feeling is he’s the best‑available‑player guy, and he’s going to take the best asset, whether it’s for the team now or something he can parlay and use to turn into another asset.

So I wish I ‑‑ I mean, I’ve kind of danced around it, and that’s a long winded way of saying I don’t know what they’re going to do.  But I trust the guy in charge.  And I trust Billy Donovan too.  That’s a heck of a get for them.

Q.  Could you speak a little bit to players projected in that 14 range and who might be there and what they could bring?

BILAS:  It could be kind of like Kelly Oubre there.  A guy like Stanley Johnson could still be around.  I don’t know that he will be.  So you’ve got so many different guys that have a chance to go there based upon what happens in front.  I tend to think there are going to be some surprises in this thing that you’re going to have somebody taken higher than expected and that’s going to put an onus on somebody else, and you could see somebody drop a little bit further.

Another guy that I think would be interesting is I don’t know if Willie Cauley‑Stein is going to be taken in the top 8.  So does he drop down there?  It’s possible.  Another guy I really like at that spot is Trey Lyles, and I actually think I have Trey Lyles slotted at number 14, I apologize.  I was on the road and I couldn’t bring all my stuff to the call.

But Trey Lyles of Kentucky is a guy that I think would be a great value pick in that neighborhood.

Q.  What are your thoughts on Justin Anderson (University of Virginia)? Is there a team that you feel like he could be a good fit for since you think he’ll probably be available at that 20th pick? Do you think Darion Atkins (University of Virginia) will sneak in late as a second round pick or forced into free agency?

BILAS:  Last part first on Darion Atkins.  I don’t have him rated in a spot where he would be drafted.  I think he would be a free agent pick up for somebody he was, I think, an extraordinarily good role player on an outstanding team.  He did a very good job defensively.  Good defensive rebounder, very good offensive rebounder.  Not much of an offensive player beyond that.

So I don’t project him, frankly, to be an NBA Draft pick, and I was not one that rated him as a Defensive Player of the Year in the league.  A very good defender, but I didn’t see him as being the best defender in the ACC.  But reasonable minds could differ on that.  I’m very respectful of his game and the worker that he is.

On Justin, I believe everything you said.  I think you should be sitting at the end of this desk and not me because he’s outstanding.  He’s such a big, strong athlete and has improved his shooting tremendously.  I don’t think he’s necessarily done improving it.  If he hadn’t hurt his hand and missed so many games and then was not the same when he came back, not only would he have been in the mix for First Team All-America, I mean, he was in the mix for National Player of the Year before he got hurt.  But I think you’d be looking at a guy that would be drafted on the fringe of the lottery and not being talked about in the 20s.

You could put him into an NBA game right now and he can compete athletically.  He doesn’t have to get any stronger.  He’s good in transition, good defensively, makes an open shot gets to the rim.  You can throw him a lob and he knows how to finish, and knows how to play in the sand box with others.  He checks every box.  He’s going to be a good NBA player, especially in the quote/unquote position list game or versatile game that the NBA bills itself as becoming.

Q.  How do you translate what they do system‑wise at the University of Virginia to how things would work for Justin Anderson defensively in the NBA?

BILAS:  I don’t think that that’s an issue at all, frankly, because it depends like they will pack line and play off of certain people when they don’t shoot it as well.  So they’ll give you some space if you can’t shoot it.  If you can shoot it, they’re out on you.  Justin is athletic, and he can guard people, so I don’t see that’s a big deal.  Same thing with Malcolm Brogdon.  He’s not in this draft, but Malcolm Brogdon, he’s not going to have any problems.  Doesn’t matter what system you put that guy in, he can play.  Same thing with Justin.  So I don’t see that as being a major problem for him.

Good players, and Justin Anderson is a really good player, can play in any system.  I don’t see system as being any sort of a barrier for success in the NBA.

Q.  You referenced the improved shooting. Do NBA scouts believe Justin Anderson is a proven shooter or just had a hot first half of the year? 

BILAS:  No, I think it was pretty clear.  His mechanics changed.  He did a much better job this year, and you don’t make that change without a significant amount of work and without it being legit.  He last year kind of floated all over the place on his jump shot.  This year when he went up, he landed in the same spot he went up from.

So his shooting mechanics, overall, his overall balance was so much better this year, and you saw that result in a much better percentage and much more consistency.  It wasn’t like he just had a hot stretch, because it’s clear that he was doing things much, much differently, and that’s not going to end because he hurt his hand.

Q.  Do you see Sam Dekker (University of Wisconsin) and Stanley Johnson (University of Arizona) evolving into pretty good offensive players?

BILAS:  Well, Sam is a good shooter.  He can make shots.  He’s a little bit streaky.  I think he’s very athletic.  He’s good in transition.  He’s long, he’s got size.  I like him a lot.  I think he is a lottery player at the end of the lottery.

I think Stanley Johnson is a lottery pick.  They’re very different.  Sam is a better shooter than Stanley.  Stanley is bigger and stronger, and he gets fouled more.  Gets to the free‑throw line more.  I think he is and can be a better defender than Sam, better rebounder.  It’s just a question of how high is his motor going to rev and how consistently because that’s been the issue with Stanley Johnson.  Is he going to defend at the highest level and sustain it for long stretches?

Offensively he improved his shooting.  He shot 37%, 38% as a three‑point shooter.  That doesn’t make him ‑‑ he’s not a good shooter.  He can make an open shot.  I think right now his offensive game, he’s easier to limit than Sam is.  But I think he’s going to continue to get better.  He’s got a lot of ability.  And I rate Stanley Johnson ahead of Sam as a prospect.  I think I’ve got Stanley around 10 or 11, and Sam Dekker around the 15, 16 range.

Q.  To piggyback on something you said earlier about Myles Turner—you said he had his best performances against the bad teams and his worst performances against the good teams. If that’s the case, why are people always comparing him to LaMarcus Aldridge, Chris Bosh and Anthony Davis—three guys that have combined to make 16 All‑Star teams? 

BILAS:  I don’t know.  Look, I think Myles Turner is a very good prospect and he has a chance.  All of those guys I put way ahead of him when they were coming out of college.  Way ahead.  I mean, Anthony Davis, like I said, was a Hall of Famer when he was coming out of college.  I didn’t have any question mark whatsoever about him.

Now I haven’t heard anybody compare Myles Turner to Anthony Davis, but that doesn’t mean I’ve had my ear to the ground on every comparison.  LaMarcus Aldridge may be fair.  Like that may be fair.  I don’t think he runs as well as LaMarcus Aldridge, but he can block shots.  He’s not as smooth of an offensive player, but Myles is skilled.  He’s got a chance to be good.

I’m not saying that he’s not going to perform at a really high level.  But I am saying this is not my opinion.  It’s a fact.  Like his best performances were against the worst teams that they played.  They were against non‑BCS teams and sub‑.500 teams.  When he played against the better teams his numbers were down and they were down significantly.

Now it may be that that’s meaningless.  It’s certainly not dispositive of the issue, and I’ve said that a million times.  That doesn’t mean he’s not going to be really good.  I have some questions.  But what I’ve said before on the call, and everybody might not have been on it the whole time, but it applies to Myles.

Like I’m not going to argue with you or anybody else that says, you know what, I think he’s Anthony Davis.  I’m not going to argue it.  I don’t see that.  But there are so many question marks in this draft and so many close calls, I would not argue with someone to try to talk you out of that opinion.  I’m just telling you that my opinion differs with that, and I have them ranked with 17 or 18 as a prospect in this draft.

Guys rank 17 or 18 on my list before have been terrific NBA players and played are if a long, long time.  So you’re a first round draft pick, he’s an NBA player.  We’re just talking about, hey, is somebody a little better or all that stuff.  Like I’m kicking all the tires and saying, hey, here’s the really good stuff, and he’s got a lot of really good stuff.  But he’s got a few things that I think are legitimate questions, and all I’m doing is raising those.

Q.  What’s your impression of Jerian Grant (Notre Dame) and Delon Wright (University of Utah)?

BILAS:  Jerian Grant is not ‑‑ I really like him.  He’s an older player.  He’s been around, he’s done it all, and he’s ready to step in and play.  I think he can initiate and play some point.  He’s not a great shooter, but he makes shots and he can create shots and make challenged shots, very good passer.  I think he has the length and athleticism to be a better defender.

I think he needs to work hard to be a better defender.  I like his prospects.  I’ve got him ranked about 19, I think, in that range.  He’s not the most efficient, but his team required him to do a lot of different things and to be really aggressive and hunting shots, and at times take some questionable ones.  He had to do that.  But he’s a really good prospect, and I think he’s a first round draft pick.  Then the second one you asked about was?

Delon Wright is excellent.  He’s got size.  He’s excellent out of pick‑and‑rolls.  Very good passer.  Very good feel for the game.  He’s not a great shooter, so that’s on the negative side.  He’s going to have to become a more competent shooter so you really have to come out and get him.  But good defender.  Like Grant, an older player.  So you’re getting a mature player who is going to come in and ready to perform.

But I’ve also got him in the 23 shot, 23 or 24, if I remember right.  But I see him as a first round draft pick, and I see him playing in the league a long time.

Q.  I was wondering what you were saying about Stanley Johnson before. It seemed like most of the year everyone was expecting Stanley to be a top five, top six, top seven pick, and I didn’t know if that was never accurate in the first place?

BILAS:  That’s a good question.  I don’t know.  I hear a lot of things now that are kind of backward looking on like Jahlil Okafor.  Like people saying, Karl‑Anthony Towns is the number one pick and the game has changed.  Well, the game changed early on in the year too when people were saying he was number one.

Now there are legit questions about Jahlil Okafor, I get that, and there are legit questions about Stanley Johnson too.  Like his positives are really good.  He’s got a couple things like I don’t know if he’s ever going to be ‑‑ I think he can be a competent shooter, but I don’t see him ‑‑ he’s not a natural shooter.  He’s not a natural scorer.  He’s a big, strong athlete that is competitive, and he’s always been a winner at the highest level.  You don’t win four State Championships in California with ‑‑ that wasn’t an accident, and he’s the only kid that’s ever done that.  And his USA Basketball teams have always won.  I just don’t think that’s an accident and he’s just been lucky.

A couple things he really needs to improve upon that I don’t know how high a ceiling.  I just don’t see him as being ‑‑ somehow he’s going to turn into a great shooter.  I just don’t believe that.  But he’s going to be a good NBA player because he can play in transition, he can put it on the deck and drive it, and he can get to the free‑throw line.  Analytics love him.  He’s a very, very efficient player, and I think he’s going to be a very, very good defender.

But, you know, like to me when there are questions about his motor, and there have been some, but that’s when I tend to go you know what?  He’s a young player, and he’s in with both feet now.  I think as he becomes a professional and getting paid, I think he’s always matched the environment he’s been in, and I think he’ll be a professional in the way he approaches it, and I think he’s going to do a really good job.

Q.  Do you think T.J. McConnell (University of Arizona) and Brandon Ashley (University of Arizona) have a chance to being picked?

BILAS:  I think Ashley does.  I doubt that T.J. will be, but it will be close.  I think he’ll go more the free agent route.  But I think Brandon Ashley will be drafted.

Q.  Just maybe stretch for potential there? What do you see with him?  Why would you take a flyer if you were maybe thinking about it? 

BILAS:  Yeah, I don’t think it’s necessarily a flyer.  I think he’s got the ability to play in the league.  He’s just not a great athlete.  And he’s a good shooter, not a great shooter.  Like he can make an open shot, but he’s got a lot of positives, but he’s not overwhelmingly good in any certain areas.  But his sort of lack of elite athleticism is why I have him rated where he’s rated in the second round.

Q.  I read a different interview you did where you said you were intrigued by this lottery because of the risk of reward with various players. I’m curious if Sam Dekker falls in that category for you?  Do you see a lot of risk and reward with him? 

BILAS:  I don’t.  I see Sam as being you know who he is.  That doesn’t mean he’s not going to get better.  Of course he’ll get better.  But when I said risk reward, what I was referring to and trying to convey, perhaps not very well, is that if you’re going to take Okafor first you’re getting the best low post player.  They don’t make him an offensive player in the low post very often.  He’s got question marks in other areas.  His ability to block shots and the like, versus Karl‑Anthony Towns who is more versatile but not as dominant in any one area.

Now he’s going to keep getting better, and I think he’s going to be an out ‑‑ both of them are going to be really good, the question is who is going to be better.  Then the intriguing thing to me is how do you process those two?  Like if we’re going to accept that the game has changed and the big guy, you don’t automatically go with the big guy, like people are saying you did, old school, a dozen years ago or so.  Then why aren’t we talking about D’Angelo Russell, Emmanuel Mudiay and Justise Winslow at the No. 1 spot, or Kristaps Porzingis who is a perimeter big guy who can really shoot it?  But I haven’t heard as much about his defensive deficiencies and the fact that he doesn’t rebound.

So where do we go on some of these things?  That is the risk‑reward stuff.  If we’re saying the game has changed, why aren’t these other guys the higher ups in the discussion for the number one pick?  If the game has changed, and that’s why we’re not going to take Jahlil Okafor No. 1, why aren’t we taking him in the top 5?  That’s that kind of thing I’m talking about.  That is kind of the risk‑reward thing that I was referring to.

Q.  You had a couple things that you said you liked about Dekker. What are some of the question marks with him?

BILAS:  Consistency.  I don’t think Sam is a great shooter.  I think he’s a guy that is streaky and he can make shots, but he’s not a consistently good shooter.  I think he needs to get stronger.  Stronger in his drive, stronger in his finishing capability.

But, heck, he was the best player last year at the LeBron James Skills Academy, and he stood out among a number of the guys that we’re talking about here.  I didn’t think it was our best year for talent last year, but he was the best player there.

Look, he’s an NBA player.  I think he’s going to do well in the NBA.  The question is do you take ‑‑ I think he’s ‑‑ if he’s around 15‑plus or minus, that’s where he should be.  That’s where I’d put him.

Q.  What do you think the Wolves should do with the No. 1 overall pick?

BILAS:  Yeah, I don’t know.  I don’t know that it’s necessarily need versus best available player.  I tend to think No. 1, unless you’re like the Detroit Lions and you’ve got a whole bunch of wide receivers and the wide receiver is the best pick, why you don’t go with the best overall player.

I’m actually kind of torn on the No. 1, sort of who the best player overall in this draft is.  I think Karl‑Anthony Towns is the most versatile player.  He’s good at everything.  There is nothing that we can tick off as far as attributes that he’s not good at.  Nothing.  Okafor has question marks on his defense, his ability to defend the pick‑and‑roll.  He’s not a big‑time shot blocker, rim protector, but he’s not a zero in that regard.

But Okafor, I tend to lean toward Okafor because he’s a dominant low‑post scorer.  Towns is not dominant in any one area.  Maybe he’ll become that.  But Okafor is the superior, low‑post scorer, and I lean toward that.  I think he was hurt during the year and it affected him.  I think he would have been much better had he not played against North Carolina, and having played the rest of the year without getting healthy.

But I would not argue with anyone, anyone that likes Towns better, not one person.  And I am sweating ‑‑ like, if it were my decision to make, I would have a really tough time with it.  And I would probably defer to all of our people to say where we are on this because I’m kind of torn.  I’m leaning one way, but I wouldn’t argue with anybody who has a differing view with me.

Q.  What are your thoughts on Mario Hezonja, and what risks could a team face taking him so high?

BILAS:  Well, I mean, Hezonja I’ve only seen him on tape.  And what I’ve seen I’m really impressed with.  Fran Fraschilla has seen he and Porzingis in person, and is the far better resource on those two guys than I am.  But I can tell you what I think.

I don’t think there is any downside with Hezonja.  There is nothing he’s not good at.  He is competitive.  He’s big, he’s strong, he’s athletic.  He can shoot it.  He’s a really good shooter.  He puts it on the deck.  He can defend.  There is nothing I don’t like about that guy, nothing.

I think it was Fran who said he’s the only guy in this draft that can compete legitimately in the three‑point contest and the Dunk Contest in the NBA.  From what I’ve seen on tape, I’d absolutely concur.  There is nothing not to like with this guy.

The caveat, I haven’t seen him in person, and I don’t know him.  Like a lot of these guys that have gone through high school here and in college, I’ve not only seen them but I’ve met them and been around them and you feel like you know them.  I do not know Mario Hezonja.  But, boy, from what I’ve seen, what’s not to like?  He looks really, really good.

Q.  Have you looked at Devin Booker (University of Kentucky), and do you think he could possibly slip into the top 10?

BILAS:  Yeah, I think he can.  I think he’s the best wing shooter in the draft.  He’s not just a catch‑and‑shoot guy.  He looked as if he was that in Kentucky because of the makeup of their team.  But I think he can put the ball on the deck.  I think he’s good in transition.  He’s got good athleticism, and he’s big and strong, handles the ball well.  He’s unselfish, willing to defend.

I think he could be a better rebounder, but he plays on a team with a lot of size.  It’s not like he had to stick his nose in there every play.  I really like him.  When I saw him play in the Bahamas in practice this last summer for eight days, I was very impressed with him in practice where he showed actually more game than he was able to show in some of the games.

I’m a believer.  I think he will be gone after the top 10.  I don’t see him lasting beyond the top 10, but you never know.  Who knows what will happen, but I’m a believer.

 

-30-

Media contact: Gianina Thompson at gianina.thompson@espn.com (@Gianina_ESPN)

ESPN to Exclusively Televise the 2015 NBA Draft Presented By State Farm

  • New Main Set: Rece Davis, Jay Bilas, Jay Williams & Jalen Rose
  • Shannon Spake Added to Telecast as Reporter
  • Special Production Open Featuring Voiceover, Musical Accompaniment from Quest Love of The Roots

ESPN will exclusively televise the 2015 NBA Draft presented by State Farm on Thursday, June 25, at 7 p.m. ET. This marks the 13th consecutive year that ESPN has been the home of the event, which will emanate from the Barclays Center in Brooklyn, N.Y. The 2015 NBA Draft will also be available on ESPN Radio and via WatchESPN.

 New Main Set

Rece Davis will host the NBA Draft on ESPN and will be joined on the main set by ESPN college basketball analyst and NBA Draft expert Jay Bilas, college basketball analyst Jay Williams and NBA analyst Jalen Rose.

Production Open featuring Quest Love

Quest Love, the drummer for the critically acclaimed hip-hop group The Roots, will be featured prominently in ESPN’s new NBA Draft production open. Quest Love contributed a voiceover and musical accompaniment to the open, which focuses on the theme of hard work and the drive to be the best.

Front Office & International Analysis

ESPN NBA analyst Tom Penn will provide the NBA Draft front office perspective, while ESPN college basketball analyst Fran Fraschilla will deliver analysis on the International players.

Reporters

  • Heather Cox returns to NBA Draft coverage as the green room reporter, while Shannon Spake, new to this year’s coverage, will handle draftee interviews once selections are made;
  • ESPN college basketball insiders Andy Katz and Jeff Goodman will report news and information on site throughout the telecast;
  • ESPN will have three remote reporters embedded with different teams, including Brian Windhorst with the Minnesota Timberwolves, Ramona Shelburne with the Los Angeles Lakers and Chris Broussard with the New York Knicks.

Fashion and fun

Moziah Bridges – a 12-year old entrepreneur, whose bowtie company gained him recognition after being featured on ABC’s hit show Shark Tank – will contribute fashion analysis of draftees and the ESPN crew.

NBA Draft on ESPN Radio

ESPN Radio will serve as the exclusive, national radio home of the 2015 NBA Draft. Marc Kestecher will be joined by Ryen Russillo and analyst P.J. Carlesimo to provide commentary.

 ESPN2 will televise a special one-hour NBA Draft preview show on Wednesday, June 24, at 7 p.m.

ESPNU will be providing post-NBA Draft coverage on Thursday night, beginning at midnight ET, with Anish Shroff, Tim Welsh and Seth Greenberg providing commentary.

For additional coverage of the 2015 NBA Draft, please visit the NBA Draft special section on ESPN.com.

-30-

Media contacts: Ben Cafardo at 860-766-3496 or Ben.Cafardo@espn.com (@Ben_ESPN);

    Gianina Thompson at 860-766-7022 or gianina.thompson@espn.com (@Gianina_ESPN).

 

ESPN Releases 2015 Body Issue Roster

Bodyrelease

http://es.pn/1IZGjhG

Bryce Harper, Kevin Love among 24 in Mag’s annual Body Issue

Bryce Harper‘s on-field body of work this season includes a .345 batting average and 24 home runs.

The star Washington Nationals outfielder’s off-field body of work includes a wish fulfilled: Harper is one of 24 athletes in the ESPN The Magazine Body Issue, online on July 6 and on newsstands July 10.

“I’ve always wanted to do the Body Issue,” Harper said. “I want to put baseball out there.”

Harper is joined by NBA stars Kevin Love of the Cleveland Cavaliers andDeAndre Jordan of the Los Angeles Clippers, New York Giants wide receiverOdell Beckham Jr., two-time WNBA All-Star Brittney Griner, USA women’s soccer star Ali Krieger, Olympians Aly Raisman and Natalie Coughlin, and newly crowned French Open champion Stan Wawrinka.

“I’m proud of my body, I’m proud of my sport, I’m proud of being a professional athlete,” said Krieger, whose team is currently in the knockout rounds of the Women’s World Cup. “Being naked is just another aspect of that.”

This is the seventh annual edition of the Body Issue. It will include photos, personal interviews and videos of the athletes, including NHL star Tyler Seguin and three members of the Indianapolis Colts offensive line: Anthony Castonzo, Todd Herremans and Jack Mewhort.

“I’ve always been a big kid,” said the 23-year-old Mewhort, who is listed at 6-foot-6, 308 pounds. “That’s why when I got this call I was like ‘they want to see me naked?’ I thought I was getting Punk’d.”

Others in the issue include professional wakeboarder Dallas Friday, rugby player Todd Clever, skateboarder Leticia Bufoni, golfer Sadena Parks, archer Khatuna Lorig, soccer player Jermaine Jones, U.S. Olympians Paige Selenski (field hockey), Amanda Bingson (hammer) and Chantae McMillan (heptathlon), along with the husband-wife team of surfer Laird Hamilton and former beach volleyball player Gabby Reece.

“Our goal is to continue to evolve the issue year after year,” ESPN The Magazine and ESPN.com editor in chief Chad Millman said. “The ability to capture both the strength and vulnerability of these extraordinary athletes through such powerful images and introspective interviews is incredibly moving.”

“One of the things I love about the Body Issue so much is that it celebrates the bodies that allow us to be successful in our sport,” said Coughlin, who has won 12 Olympic swimming medals. “As a sports fan, I love seeing the differences in body types.”

Video http://es.pn/1Gv8O2B

ESPNBodyRoster_10x4_F

 

 

 

 

Media Contact:  Carrie Kreiswirth

 

ESPN Weekly Enterprise jOURnalism Release

 A Father’s Legacy

 june 18 SCFeatured SportsCenter (Sunday, 10 a.m. and 11 p.m. ET)

june 18 2015 SCF frates

This Father’s Day, the catalyst behind last year’s miraculous Ice Bucket Challenge is celebrating a new phenomenon. Pete Frates is now the father of a baby girl named Lucy. While ALS has left him physically limited, it has not stopped him from enjoying every second of fatherhood. Pete’s own father, John, passed down a legacy of strength and perseverance by example. They have now forged a new bond through their mission of ALS awareness, traveling cross country in search of a cure. SC Featured finds Pete passing on his own legacy, to his daughter, as Tom Rinaldi reports.

“Becoming a father has been the greatest gift of all. When I am feeling down or sick all I need to do is look at her little face and I immediately feel better.” – Pete Frates

I think it comes down to one word, and that’s legacy… You want to leave your legacy in a better position than you carved in this world.” – John Frates   

 Still Fighting

OTL 25th logo 1Outside the Lines (Sunday, 9 a.m. ESPN; 10 a.m. ESPN2)

june 18 2015 box1Credit: ESPN/Producer Willie Weinbaum

Magomed Abdusalamov with his wife Bakanay Abdusalamova holding their youngest daughter

In an award-winning February 2014 report, Outside the Lines examined the story of heavyweight contender Magomed Abdusalamov, whose devastating brain injury three months earlier nearly killed him and raised serious questions about the treatment he received. Now the severely disabled former fighter and his wife, the parents of three young girls, confront profound challenges every day. John Barr reports.

“Our oldest more or less understands what happened to him. She seems to have accepted it and she’s waiting for her dad to get better. The middle one is always asking, when will her dad be back, she even made him a birthday card, ‘Daddy, I miss you, you’re the strongest’. It’s like she’s waiting for that other dad to come back.” Bakanay Abdusalamova, Magomed Abdusalamov’s wife, on how their two oldest daughters (ages 9 and 6) are reacting to their father’s condition

“The man’s face was horribly disfigured. He was making all classic complaints that would be consistent with potentially having a brain injury. And then they abandoned the guy, didn’t put him in an ambulance whereby he would have gotten immediate care once he did get to the hospital that night.”  — Paul Edelstein, Abdusalamov’s family attorney, on the civil lawsuit accusing New York State Athletic Commission doctors of negligence and medical malpractice.

june 18 FR logo

FrontRow’s latest “Beyond The Story” entry:

june 18 harris pool

Several ESPNers explain how the Golden State Warriors’ Harrison Barnes became ESPN’s NBA Finals social media MVP by providing virtually all-access content across various platforms for his fans.

After World Cup Elimination, Ivory Coast Coach Makes Case for More

espnW

june 18 w soccer

Inspired by her players despite a 31 loss to Norway and elimination from the FIFA Women’s World Cup, coach Clementine Toure wants more funding to help Ivory Coast’s preparation and development. Andrea Canales reports.

 Are Fans Fantastic? Producer Goes from Pictures to Prose to Report

justine3

First-time author Justine Gubar (far right) was a guest on Outside The Lines to discuss fan behavior

ESPN producer Justine Gubar talks about hooliganism, alcohol, over-the-top parents and the double standard for policing sports riots and protest riots when discussing her debut book  FANATICUS: Mischief and Madness in the Modern Sports Fan released this week.

Sports Reporters

This week’s Panel* (Sunday, 9:30 a.m. ESPN; 10:30 a.m., ESPN2)

Screen-Shot-2015-02-19-at-3.29.19-PM

Mike Lupica guest host, Howard Bryant, Israel Gutierrez, Bob Ryan

*Subject to change

 

NBA League Pass to Include Single Game & Individual Team Offerings

NBA_DigitalNBA League Pass to Include Single Game & Individual Team Offerings

New Live Game Options Available for 2015-16 NBA Season 

NBA LEAGUE PASS, the out-of-market live game service, will tip off the 2015-16 NBA season by providing fans with the opportunity to purchase single games and individual team packages.

The single game offering will allow fans to select individual NBA LEAGUE PASS live games on a given day during the regular season.  The individual team package, available for all 30 NBA teams, will give fans the option to follow one team through the regular season.

Along with the new packages, NBA LEAGUE PASS will continue to offer its traditional, comprehensive full season package, which provides access to nearly 1,000 live out-of-market games and a rich archive of NBA content.

These new offerings will be made available during the 2015-16 season by NBA Digital to broadband and mobile subscribers on iOS and Android devices.  Details on where else these new offerings may be purchased, and information regarding 2015-16 pricing for all NBA LEAGUE PASS packages, will be announced in mid-July.

NBA LEAGUE PASS is available through cable, satellite, and telco distributors and includes NBA LEAGUE PASS Broadband.

NBA LEAGUE PASS is a part of NBA Digital, the NBA’s extensive cross-platform portfolio of digital assets jointly managed by the NBA and Turner Sports, which includes NBA TV, NBA Mobile, NBA.com, NBADLEAGUE.com and WNBA.com.

-30-

Most-Watched & Highest-Rated NBA Finals Ever on ABC

Game 6 Averages 23,254,000 Viewers; Broadcast Peaks with Audience of 28,744,000

 The 2015 NBA Finals, in which the Golden State Warriors defeated the Cleveland Cavaliers 4-2, is the most-watched and highest-rated ever on ABC, according to Nielsen. The six-game series averaged nearly 20 million viewers (19,939,000 P2+) and an 11.6 U.S. household rating, up 30 percent and 26 percent, respectively, from the 2014 NBA Finals (Miami-San Antonio).

Last night’s Game 6 delivered an average audience of 23,254,000 viewers, peaking with 28,744,000 viewers from 11:45 p.m.-midnight ET, and a 13.4 U.S. household rating. This was up 13 percent and nine percent, respectively, from the most recent NBA Finals Game 6, which was in 2013 (Miami-San Antonio).

For the 48th consecutive time, the NBA Finals propelled ABC to win the night across all of television (broadcast and cable) and across all key demos, more than doubling its competition.

NBA Finals on WatchESPN

The 2015 NBA Finals was the most-viewed ever on WatchESPN. It averaged 757,000 unique viewers, which was up 102 percent from last year.  Additionally, it delivered an average minute audience of 207,000 viewers, up 116 percent from 2014.

 NBA Finals on ESPN Deportes

The NBA Finals on ESPN Deportes averaged a 0.7 Hispanic Household Rating with 144,000 Hispanic viewers (P2+). The series is tied with 2014 for the highest-rated ever in Spanish-language. Last night’s Game 6 averaged a 1.1 Hispanic Household Rating with 243,000 Hispanic viewers, up 22 percent and 17 percent, respectively, for Game 6 in 2013.

NBA Countdown, ABC’s NBA Finals pre-game show, averaged 5,466,000 viewers and a 3.5 U.S. household rating through six games. This is up 21 percent and 23 percent, respectively, from 2014.

For more information on metered market ratings, digital numbers and local market rankings, please visit ESPN Media Zone to access this morning’s press release.

ABC has been the exclusive home to the NBA Finals since 2002-2003 season.

-30-

Media contact: Ben Cafardo at 860-766-3496 or ben.cafardo@espn.com (@Ben_ESPN).

Highest-Rated NBA Finals Ever on ABC

The 2015 NBA Finals, in which the Golden State Warriors defeated the Cleveland Cavaliers 4-2, is the highest-rated ever on ABC, based on metered market ratings from Nielsen. The six-game series averaged a 13.9 overnight rating, which is up 31 percent from a 10.6 for the 2014 NBA Finals.

Tuesday’s Game 6 delivered a 15.9 overnight rating, making it the highest-rated Game 6 ever on ABC. It was up eight percent from a 14.7 for the most recent NBA Finals Game 6 – (Miami-San Antonio 2013).  Last night’s broadcast peaked with an 18.8 rating from 11:45 p.m.-midnight ET.

For the 48th consecutive time, the NBA Finals is expected to win the night across all of television (broadcast and cable), more than doubling its competition.

San Francisco market record

In the San Francisco market, Game 6 generated a 40.7, which is the highest-rated NBA game ever in the market as far as records go back (2002). Additionally, Game 6 delivered a 42.0 in the Cleveland market, which ranks as the fifth-highest rated NBA game ever on ABC or ESPN.

 Game 6 on WatchESPN

Last night’s Game 6 saw 939,000 unique viewers on WatchESPN, which is the most ever for an NBA game on the platform. In addition, Game 6 drew an average minute audience of 292,000 viewers, which also ranks as the most-watched NBA game ever on the platform.

NBA Countdown, ABC’s NBA Finals pre-game show, delivered a 5.1 overnight rating, up 16 percent from a 4.4 for the most recent Game 6 pre-game show, in 2013.

*ABC has been the exclusive home to the NBA Finals since the 2002-2003 season.

-30-

Media contact: Ben Cafardo at 860-766-3496 or ben.cafardo@espn.com (@Ben_ESPN).

 

Most-Watched NBA Finals Ever on ABC through Five Games

Game 5 Averages More Than 20 Million Viewers; Broadcast Peaks with Audience of 24.8 Million

The 2015 NBA Finals, in which the Golden State Warriors lead the Cleveland Cavaliers 3-2, is the most-watched ever on ABC through five games, according to Fast Nationals from Nielsen. The series is averaging 19,215,000 viewers, which is up 25 percent from 15,373,000 viewers last year (Miami-San Antonio).

Sunday’s Game 5 averaged 20,511,000 viewers (P2+), which is up 15 percent from 17,859,000 viewers for last year’s Game 5. It is also the most-watched NBA Finals Game 5 in more than a decade. Last night’s ABC broadcast peaked with an audience of 24,840,000 viewers from 10:30-11 p.m. ET.

The NBA Finals propelled ABC to win the night for the 47th consecutive time across all of television (broadcast and cable) and across all key demos.

Game 5 on WatchESPN

NBA Finals Game 5 generated 741,600 unique viewers on WatchESPN, which is the second-highest ever for an NBA game on the platform. Additionally, WatchESPN saw an average minute audience of 198,300, which is the third-highest ever for an NBA game on the platform.

For details on metered market ratings and local numbers, please visit ESPN Media Zone for this morning’s press release.

The 2015 NBA Finals will continue with Game 6 on Tuesday, June 16, at 9 p.m. on ABC. Mike Breen, in his record-setting 10th season as the voice of The Finals, will continue to provide commentary with analysts Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson and reporter Doris Burke. NBA Countdown will precede the broadcast at 8:30 p.m. with host Sage Steele and analysts Jalen Rose and Doug Collins.

ABC has been the exclusive home of the NBA Finals since the 2002-03 season.

-30-

Media contact: Ben Cafardo at 860-766-3496 or ben.cafardo@espn.com (@Ben_ESPN).

Highest-Rated NBA Finals Ever on ABC through Five Games

The 2015 NBA Finals, in which the Golden State Warriors lead the Cleveland Cavaliers 3-2, is the highest-rated ever on ABC through five games, according to Nielsen.

Last night’s Game 5 delivered a 14.2 overnight rating, which is the highest-rated Game 5 on ABC in more than a decade and up 21 percent from an 11.7 for last year’s Game 5 (Miami-San Antonio).  The broadcast peaked with an 18.1 from 10:30-10:45 p.m. ET.

San Francisco Market Sets another Record

The 2015 NBA Finals set another local ratings record for Game 5. In the San Francisco market, the ABC broadcast generated a 33.6 rating, an all-time best for an NBA game on the network. In the Cleveland market, the broadcast delivered a 42.5 rating, making it the third-highest rated NBA game ever on the network (trails only Games 3 and 4).

The NBA Finals is expected to win the night for the 47th consecutive time across all of television (broadcast and cable).

The record-setting 2015 NBA Finals is averaging a 13.5 overnight rating through five games, which is up 27 percent from a 10.6 last year.

Last night’s edition of NBA Countdown, ABC’s NBA Finals pre-game show, delivered a 3.7 overnight rating, which was up 28 percent from a 2.9 for last year’s Game 5 pre-game show.

The 2015 NBA Finals will continue with Game 6 on Tuesday, June 16, at 9 p.m. on ABC. Mike Breen, in his record-setting 10th season as the voice of The Finals, will continue to provide commentary with analysts Jeff Van Gundy and Mark Jackson and reporter Doris Burke. NBA Countdown will precede the broadcast at 8:30 p.m. with host Sage Steele and analysts Jalen Rose and Doug Collins.

ABC has been the exclusive home of the NBA Finals since the 2002-03 season.

-30-

Media contact: Ben Cafardo at 860-766-3496 or ben.cafardo@espn.com (@Ben_ESPN).