Are we getting worse at the NBA draft?

haberstroh_article_1920x1080_061719_nba_draft.jpg
USA Today

Are we getting worse at the NBA draft?

The Toronto Raptors just won an NBA championship without a single lottery pick on the roster. It’s true. Kawhi Leonard, the Finals MVP, was picked 15th. Kyle Lowry, Pascal Siakam and Serge Ibaka were all picked at the back of the first round. Marc Gasol, Danny Green, Norman Powell and Patrick McCaw were second-rounders. Fred VanVleet and Jeremy Lin weren’t even drafted. 

Not a single top-10 pick on the team. When asked about this stunner of a fact ahead of the NBA Finals, Gasol told reporters the draft was so important to him that he was actually asleep when he found out he was selected 48th in 2007. And now he’s a champion and NBA Defensive Player of the Year.


    Said Gasol: “I don’t know what it says about the draft.”

    On the topic, Lowry, who was picked 24th by Memphis in 2006, told the Toronto Sun: “Picks don’t mean anything.”

    It certainly seems that way, to an extent. Not only was the Finals MVP drafted outside the lottery, but so was the presumptive regular-season MVP in Giannis Antetokounmpo, who was drafted 15th overall in 2013. The reigning NBA Defensive Player of the Year, Rudy Gobert, was drafted 27th by Denver and traded for the 46th pick and cash. The DPOY before him, Draymond Green, was a second-rounder himself.

    On the other side of the equation, we’ve had two massive misfires at the No.1 pick in the last six drafts. Just 20 months after being the top pick in 2017, Markelle Fultz was traded for Jonathon Simmons and what will likely be a few second-rounders. Anthony Bennett, the No. 1 pick in 2013, is out of the league.

    Lottery teams prepare countless reports, stay up ungodly hours and talk to hundreds of people to help identify the next star. Teams have more data than ever and, with social media, more insight into a player’s mindset and personality traits. And yet, the draft seems as much of a crapshoot as ever and lottery teams continue to miss on stars. Just look at the NBA champions.

    As we’re getting ready for Thursday night, we have to ask ourselves: Are we getting worse at the draft?

    * * *

    The NBA draft has always been a difficult enterprise. Clifton McNeely, the very first pick of the very first draft back in 1947 (when it was called the Basketball Association of America/BAA) never actually played a single game in the NBA. Instead, he decided to coach high school basketball. (Imagine if Zion Williamson did that).

    There have been busts and always will be busts. That’s the nature of trying to look into the crystal ball. 

    But are teams actually getting worse at looking into the crystal ball? 

    It would stand to reason that scouting technology and the rise of analytics have raised the accuracy of front offices. Gadgets have certainly helped other industries. Short-term five-day forecasts, for example, are nearly as accurate as two-day projections were three decades ago. Netflix estimates that 75 percent of viewer activity is driven purely by its recommendation algorithms geared to predict what you’ll watch next

    But the NBA draft, apparently, isn't getting any more predictive. If anything, it might be getting worse.

    “It’s still a crapshoot,” said one prominent scout. “With all the available resources and new technology, we certainly haven’t gotten better.”

    If the draft were perfectly predictive, the best player would always be picked first and the worst player available picked last. No undrafted players would ever step foot onto an NBA court.

    Of course, that doesn’t happen. But the correlation of pick slot and win shares doesn’t seem to be getting stronger. That is, if we look into every draft since 1990, the best players -- as measured by prominent value metric win shares -- aren’t increasingly getting picked at the top, or near it. 

    Let’s look at the trends. Over the last five drafts, pick slot and player production (as measured by win shares) has a correlation coefficient of -0.38, indicating a moderate negative relationship between the two variables. In less nerdy terms, as picks go down from 60 to 1, we’re seeing player win share totals going in the opposite direction -- up and up and up. It’s not a perfect minus-1.0 relationship where the closer you get to No. 1, the more value is produced. (Cash winnings at a pro golf event are a perfectly negative relationship; the lower the score, the more money won).

    If drafting was completely random, we’d see a correlation coefficient of zero. If the best players were always selected 60th, we’d see a perfectly positive 1.0 relationship. As you go closer to No. 60, the better the players get. Days without shaving and beard length are a perfectly positive relationship; the more days you leave the razor on the shelf, the longer the whiskers.

    Where does minus-0.38 compare? The five drafts before that (2009 to 2013), that same number was minus-.50, indicating a stronger association between draft slot and player production. The five years before that, it was minus-0.41. From 1994 to 1998, that number was minus-0.52, the strongest five-year sample in the bunch.

    In sum: the last five years -- where intel on players on and off the court has skyrocketed -- haven’t been the sharpest work by NBA executives. If anything, the last half-decade of drafting seems to be more random than ever. 

    To be fair, win shares may not be the most accurate metric to evaluate draft performance and even if it was, it tells only part of the story. Recent drafts may seem more inaccurate simply because players haven’t fully developed; Joel Embiid was considered a bust two years after getting drafted. And who knows, maybe Fultz becomes an All-Star in Orlando.

    But even when there’s more information out there, it seems we’re not getting better at drafting. Executives have some theories as to why.

    * * *

    By now you’re probably wondering: Well, what about 2018? And you’re right. Deandre Ayton, Marvin Bagley, Luka Doncic, Jaren Jackson Jr. and Trae Young (picks Nos. 1-5, respectively) had terrific rookie seasons. For the first time since the 1984-85 season, the top five picks in the previous NBA draft have all been selected to the NBA All-Rookie first team (there was no such thing as a All-Rookie second team that season.) 

    But 2017 was horrible by comparison. The Philadelphia 76ers were so confident in Fultz that they traded a future first-round pick to the Boston Celtics in order to move up two slots to draft the University of Washington prospect No. 1 overall. The Sixers dumped him less than two years later after a bizarre string of events.

    That same draft year, Donovan Mitchell, who has scored nearly 1,000 more points than the next-highest player in his class, was selected 13th overall. Kyle Kuzma, who is averaging 17.3 points per game in his NBA career, fell to pick No. 27 and was traded to the Los Angeles Lakers on draft night. 

    If the 2017 draft was redone, it’s hard to imagine 18 teams passing on Atlanta Hawks big man John Collins. Denver’s Monte Morris, who averaged 24 minutes per game for the 54-win Nuggets this season, went 51st. In a do-over draft, does Morris go higher than Fultz? That it’s even a question shows how much of a gamble the draft is.

    But in talking with executives (who all declined to go on the record so close to the draft), there’s something else going on here. One prevailing theory seemed to arise: They’re not getting dumber -- the players are just getting younger.

    There’s something to that. I pulled up all the draft data from Basketball Reference since 1990, when Derrick Coleman was selected No. 1 overall, and analyzed the ages of the draftees. Turns out that the average age of the 2018 draft class was 20.7 years old. That’s the lowest number of all the 29 classes I studied.

    Last year was such a young draft. The top five picks were 19.9, 19.3, 19.3, 18.8 and 19.1 years old, respectively. That’s the first time in NBA history that the top five picks were teenagers. To put that in perspective, as recently as 2013 -- the Anthony Bennett year -- there were no teenagers in the top five; Bennett, Victor Oladipo, Otto Porter Jr., Cody Zeller and Alex Len were all in their 20s. 

    “The average age of drafted players is the lowest of all time,” noted one assistant GM. “That probably increases variance.”

    That might be true, though the accuracy of the 2018 draft class figures to be an outlier. The age limit of 2005 has given rise to the one-and-done. The average age of top-five picks over the last five years is 19.3 compared to 21.9 in years 1990 to 1993. Heck, Dikembe Mutombo was the same age when he was drafted in 1991 as Bradley Beal is today (25). Michael Olowokandi was 23 when he was the No. 1 overall pick. Sure, Fultz might have been a mistake at No. 1, but at least there’s an excuse; he was barely 19 when he was drafted after a one-and-done season at Washington.

    Another scout suggested one recent factor: the mock draft effect. The proliferation of mock drafts in recent years has created a false sense of general consensus. For example, NBA.com now publishes a Consensus Mock Draft that aggregates 10 different mock drafts with varying levels of intel. 

    Some teams use mock drafts, especially early in the season, to outline which players they watch in tournaments and on tape. As a player moves up the mock drafts or big boards, personnel people may be trapped into confirmation bias. If a player is rising, there must be a reason why. You see what you want to see.

    “A lot of guys get drafted because they’ve been on a mock draft board at certain positions for a while,” said the West scout. “It’s kind of a mob mentality. Web sites and agents are gassing it up.”

    Mock drafts are supposed to be a reflection of the market, which would be a helpful resource of data. But what if the market is a mirage? With so little information on these youngsters, executives may be desperate to find clues, no matter how good or bad those clues are.

    * * *

    The Golden State Warriors’ dynasty launched a league-wide hunt for the next Draymond Green, who was famously picked 35th in the 2012 draft. This year, front offices will surely hear from powerful people with a task to identify the next Fred VanVleet, the undrafted Wichita State product who played so well that he got a vote for NBA Finals MVP. 

    You could probably say the same for Malcom Brogdon, a 2016 second-round pick, who won NBA Rookie of the Year and became a 50-40-90 club member this season for the best regular-season team in the NBA.

    There is one characteristic that Green, VanVleet and Brogdon share beyond the fact that they weren’t first round picks: They played all four years at college. 

    Perhaps we’ve invested so far in the one-and-done era that there may be what I’ll call a Diploma Bias -- guys who played all four years may be undervalued in the market. These prospects are usually labeled as “low upside” players, but VanVleet just proved his ceiling as one of the best players on a Finals team. Same with Draymond Green and Danny Green, the latter of whom went 46th after four years at North Carolina.

    Sure, one-and-done players may be sexy because they did so well in just one year of experience, but it’s still, you know, one year of data. One executive sees the one-and-done problem having a compounding effect.

    “Whoever plays in college next year won’t play against Zion Williamson,” said a front office executive. “That reduces their competitive environment.”

    Which makes it tougher to evaluate, even with technology and analytics.

    “Although there is more information, the signal in that information has dropped,” the executive said.

    This isn’t to say that Cam Johnson, who is 23 years old after his senior year at UNC, should go No. 1 over Zion. But it might mean that he’s being unfairly punished for his age. For those who are looking at the next Draymond Green, it may be worth taking a look at Brandon Clarke, who is 22.8 years old but shares much of the same versatility and defensive acumen that we heard about Green. The same goes for Virginia’s defender, De’Andre Hunter, who is 21 and a half.

    While everyone chases the next kid and bemoans how hard it is to draft in today’s environment, it might make more sense to zig when everyone zags. Old may be the new young.

    Follow me on Twitter (@TomHaberstroh) and bookmark NBCSports.com/Haberstroh for my latest stories, videos and podcasts.

    It's unfair to task LeBron James, Lakers with winning title for Kobe Bryant

    200212-lebron-james-haberstroh.jpg
    NBC Sports

    It's unfair to task LeBron James, Lakers with winning title for Kobe Bryant

    Two summers ago, LeBron James made his choice. By agreeing to sign with the middling Los Angeles Lakers, James was going to try to climb another mountain. 

    LeBron knew he would be stepping into the shadow of the beloved Kobe Bryant and trying to rescue the franchise from something it had not known in some time, mediocrity. 

    James knew it was a tall task. Those in his inner circle warned him that this would be the biggest challenge of his illustrious NBA career -- even more ambitious than bringing a title to the city of Cleveland, more difficult than winning back-to-back titles in Miami after the 2011 Finals debacle, a longer longshot than passing his idol Michael Jordan on the all-time scoring list. 

    Before James came to the rescue, the shine had worn off the Lakers. Free agent after free agent passed. The rebuild wasn’t working. No team in the NBA had lost more games in its previous five seasons than the Los Angeles Lakers. In some eyes, rescuing the Lakers would go down as perhaps LeBron’s greatest basketball achievement.

    But this? James did not sign up for this. No human being should be expected to shoulder the death of Kobe Bryant, his daughter Gianna and the other seven who perished in the tragic helicopter crash last month. No one can bottle up all that grief, soak up all those tears and absorb the anger for a world in mourning. 


     

    But here we are. The “Win It For Kobe” movement seems to be taking hold both locally and nationally and it makes me extremely uneasy.

    A tragedy like the one in Calabasas shouldn’t be minimized by the bounces of an orange ball. Beyond that very obvious thing, it’s clear we’re putting LeBron James in an unfair, no-win situation. If the Lakers win the title, it will, for many, be remembered as Kobe willing it from the heavens. If the Lakers lose, it will likely be seen as LeBron, once again, proving he could never be Kobe. It all feels like a trap.

    I hope I’m wrong. I hope fans will understand that an early postseason exit from James, Anthony Davis and Frank Vogel in his first year as the Lakers’ head coach shouldn’t be construed as some sort of failure to honor Bryant’s death. Basketball can’t be that serious, right? But I also saw what James’ hometown fans wrote on poster boards when he returned to Cleveland from the Miami Heat.

    Sports so often give adults a reason to believe in fairy tales, that perhaps Kobe is up there pushing the Lakers along this championship quest. LeBron himself has leaned into it, for sure. When LeBron leaped into a double-pump reverse dunk in Staples Center last week, it was one of the sensational plays of the season, captured in this iconic image by the great NBA photographer Andrew D. Bernstein.

    But hours later, the Lakers took it to another level and posted a jaw-dropping video of Kobe Bryant doing the same dunk on the same hoop 19 years ago, a clip that generated over 25 million views.

    LeBron would later admit he didn’t do it as a tribute. It was just a remarkable coincidence. LeBron could have left it there, but instead:

    “Ever see the movie ‘The 6th Man’?” LeBron told ESPN. “Kobe came down, put himself in my body and gave me that dunk on that break.”

    Believing in this sort of thing can be comforting on some level. Everyone grieves and heals differently. In the aftermath of the unthinkable in Calabasas, LeBron has mostly been a figure of strength. Just before the Lakers’ first game at Staples Center since Bryant’s death, James went off script and delivered a moving speech in front of a grieving crowd all adorned in Bryant’s jersey. Much of the millions watching at home wept (I know I did, thinking about my own daughters).

    Speaking to executives and coaches around the league before that game, the overriding feeling was there was no way that the Lakers wouldn’t win that game. The stars would align and the Lakers would triumph in an emotional tribute to Bryant.

    Reality had other plans. The Lakers lost by eight. Damian Lillard dazzled his way to 48 points and turned that fairy tale inside out. It was a sobering reminder that James and Davis aren’t superheroes. The Lakers are still a basketball team with weaknesses that can be exploited.

    We should be ready for more nights like that. The cold, hard truth is that the Lakers aren’t likely to win the championship in June.

    At least that’s what the sharp money says. As of Thursday, FiveThirtyEight.com projections has the Lakers and Milwaukee Bucks tied at 19 percent chance of winning the championship, with the LA Clippers trailing just behind at 18 percent odds to take home the Larry O’Brien trophy.

    Even if the Lakers go on a run and nudge themselves into the lead by the end of the regular season, being the favorite doesn’t mean it’s likely. The flipside of 19 percent means that there’s an 81 percent chance that a team other than the one dressed in purple and gold will win it all. The Lakers’ championship probability is roughly the same as Laker sharpshooter Danny Green missing a free throw (Green is a career 81 percent shooter at the charity stripe). Again, not great odds.

    In some ways, LeBron is a victim of his own success. Thanks to his play in his 17th season, the Lakers are way ahead of schedule. The preseason over/under on the Lakers stood at 50.5 wins. They’re on pace to win 63. So much of it is due to LeBron’s brilliance, as it was on full display in Wednesday’s overtime win against Denver (32 points, 14 assists and 12 rebounds was LeBron’s line). 

    But if you look deeper, you’ll see the full extent of LeBron’s impact. The Lakers are a baffling minus-55 this season when Anthony Davis is playing but James is on the bench. The other side of that coin is just as telling: The Lakers are plus-166 when James is playing and Davis is on the bench, per PBPstats.com.

    Without LeBron, where would the Lakers be right now? This gives you a hint: Over the last two seasons, the Lakers have been outscored by 201 points in the 2,765 minutes with James on the bench, or getting beat by 3.5 points every 48 minutes. That’s the same differential as the this season’s Minnesota Timberwolves, who are 16-27.

    LeBron is doing what he set out to do: resurrect the Lakers into championship contenders. The on-off numbers illustrate the kind of impact he’s had on the organization; how much the 35-year-old means to their success. Three years after firing their front office two days ahead of the trade deadline and being the laughing stock of the NBA (hello, Knicks!), the Lakers are now 41-12 and blazing to the West’s No. 1 seed -- all because of LeBron. It’s hard to say otherwise.

    But with the Lakers exceeding expectations, it feels like we’re building toward an inevitable letdown. The signs are there. The Lakers are 0-5 against the Clippers, Bucks, Boston Celtics and Philadelphia 76ers this season despite LeBron averaging 21.2 points, 10.0 rebounds and 9.0 assists in those games. The Lakers’ struggles at the top have less to do with LeBron and more to do with the fact that Dwight Howard inked to a non-guaranteed contract is often the team’s third-best player.

    So much can change between now and June. The Lakers, as it stands, are not likely to win it all. If they don’t, it almost certainly won’t be because of LeBron. They’re not there without him. 

    If the Lakers do indeed fall short of the title, resist the urge to put Kobe’s death on LeBron or the Lakers. It’s not fair. How much can one man possibly do? LeBron is only human. If Kobe’s tragic death has taught us anything, it’s that humans can only control so much of their fate. This isn’t a mountain. This is a bottomless void. James shouldn’t be asked to fill it.

    Follow me on Twitter (@TomHaberstroh), and bookmark NBCSports.com/Haberstroh for my latest stories and videos and subscribe to the Habershow podcast.

    Trade deadline winners and losers: Heat, Rockets bolster title hopes; Warriors, Cavs create questions

    haberstroh_article_1920x1080_020720.jpg
    NBC Sports

    Trade deadline winners and losers: Heat, Rockets bolster title hopes; Warriors, Cavs create questions

    That’s a wrap on the NBA trade deadline. With a shallow free agency class this summer and a flattened championship race, this trade deadline figured to be an arms race rather than a scavenger hunt for cap space.

    And there was action -- just not at the very top. Both top seeds, Milwaukee and the Lakers, stood pat at the deadline. But there was plenty of movement below.

    On Thursday morning, I thought this column would be a winners-only piece. I thought most teams had done an impressive job of managing their assets. But that changed by the day’s end. Let’s hash out the winners and losers.

    Winners

    Miami Heat

    It’s still stunning to me that the Grizzlies didn’t command a pick for taking on Dion Waiters and James Johnson’s contract. Yes, Justise Winslow is only 23 years old, the same age as their rookie Brandon Clarke, but Winslow’s injury woes figured to warrant some sort of draft pick compensation. 

    Alas, Heat prez Pat Riley and GM Andy Elisburg were able to land Andre Iguodala, Jae Crowder and Solomon Hill without giving up anything in the draft pick department. Yes, there’s risk here. Iguodala is 36 years old and hasn’t played competitive basketball in half a year. Giving him a two-year extension (second year is a team option) before he steps foot on the court may prove to be unwise.

    But the upside of Iguodala, Crowder and Jimmy Butler wreaking havoc on opposing wings is well worth the price of Winslow and two contracts dumps. Scoring against the Heat is going to be a problem in the playoffs. 

    Winslow has struggled to gain traction in the NBA as a tweener with an inconsistent jump shot. It was hard to see how he’d fit in the Heat’s playoff attack without the ball in his hands. The Heat have plenty of young players in Tyler Herro, Kendrick Nunn and Bam Adebayo -- seriously, Adebayo is twenty-freakin’-two -- to balance out the aging nucleus of Iguodala, Butler and Goran Dragic. 

    On paper, this doesn’t put them over the top in the East. But if the Bucks lose a top guy to injury, the Heat have positioned themselves to have the inside track to the Finals. And they still have long-term flexibility. If Iguodala doesn’t work out, they project to have about $50 million in cap space in 2021 when Giannis Antetokounmpo, LeBron James, Paul George and Kawhi Leonard could all be free agents. 

    Houston Rockets

    This Rockets team is going to be wild. Really, this trade comes down to this: Can you guard James Harden one-on-one? Can you guard Russell Westbrook one-on-one? By essentially swapping Clint Capela for Robert Covington, the Houston Rockets are betting that opponents’ answers to both are a hard no. Whether that’s true or not will seal the Rockets’ fate.

    The Oklahoma City Thunder found out the hard way that Westbrook needs to be in a five-out system that frees up the paint. Steven Adams, a non-spacing big, jammed up Westbrook’s driving lanes as Portland made sure that Westbrook saw multiple defenders in front of him at every turn in the playoffs. 

    In the regular season, when teams don’t have nearly as much time to scout and scheme as they do come playoff time, Westbrook can get by simply on his sheer athleticism. Westbrook and Adams lineups scored a healthy 112.9 points per 100 possessions last regular season, per NBA stats. In the postseason, that figure plummeted to 104.9 and the Thunder got waved off by Damian Lillard. The previous season, similar story: 122.2 offensive rating with that duo in the 2017-18 regular season, but down to 102.8 in the playoffs.

    The Rockets didn’t want to risk that happening again. Like Adams, Capela is a paint-dwelling big who can get played off the floor in crunchtime. Covington, a long-time darling of the analytics community, can space the floor on the wings and make sure that Westbrook’s defender sits alone on an island with no one behind him. 

    As a 6-foot-7 defensive-minded wing, Covington is a Trevor Ariza, James Posey type -- a guy who’s never going to blow you away with his box score stats but fits perfectly next to stars. The Rockets are well aware that Covington’s team’s point differential has been better when he’s on the floor compared to when he’s on the bench for each of the six seasons in the NBA. Covington isn’t a dribble-drive guy, but next to Westbrook and Harden, there may not be much air in the ball left anyway.

    In some ways, this was a necessary move once the Rockets acquired Westbrook. I really didn’t like the Westbrook trade from the start; he’s probably the worst high-volume 3-point shooter of all-time and plays in a system predicated on efficient 3-point shooting. To me, Westbrook’s uptempo attack would be exposed in the playoffs when the game slows down. Spreading the floor with Covington, a career 36 percent shooter from deep, will help decongest the paint and raise the ceiling on Westbrook’s game.

    I liked what all four teams did in this trade, but to me, the Rockets fared out best, with a little help from their executive farm system. You rarely see deals this size -- per ESPN, it’s the most players involved in a trade since a 2000 Patrick Ewing deal that was so long ago it involved Vernon Maxwell -- because it isn’t easy for executives to have intimate knowledge of rival teams’ wants, needs and negotiation styles.

    But it helped grease the wheels that three of the architects involved -- Denver GM Arturas Karnisovas, Houston GM Daryl Morey and Minnesota president of basketball operations Gersson Rosas -- used to work together in the Rockets front office from 2008 to 2013. 

    Houston will likely be on the lookout for a center on the buyout market. Asking the 6-foot-6 P.J. Tucker to do that full-time is a, um, tall order. Don’t be surprised if the Rockets land a veteran like Charlotte big man Marvin Williams on the buyout market. Or, if they’re lucky, Tristan Thompson.

    Milwaukee Bucks

    They’re 44-7. The Los Angeles Lakers didn’t do anything. Neither did Toronto or Boston. Philly added Alec Burks and Glenn Robinson III, but Thursday’s romp showed they need more than that. And the Bucks aren’t exactly shaking in their boots now that the Clippers added Marcus Morris. 

    If the Heat were able to snag Danilo Gallinari, the Bucks may have been sweating right now. But Iguodala is too much of a question mark to strike fear into the Bucks, who have the seventh-highest net rating in NBA history this far into the season. Giannis Antetokounmpo and the Bucks are firmly in the driver’s seat and the road ahead didn’t get any bumpier.

    Atlanta Hawks

    The 25-year-old Capela makes more sense on the youthful Hawks than the title-hunting Rockets. I worried about Capela’s health when it came to the Rockets’ championship window, but he can develop on a more patient timeline next to All-Star starter Trae Young. Capela is a non-shooting big who has missed seven games this season with foot problems and relies on his hops to make an impact on both ends. 

    Foot problems with non-shooting bigs will make Hawks fans queasy, but in Atlanta, he can rest his heel injury and properly rehab without putting pressure on himself to return too soon for a title quest. 

    John Collins and Capela aren’t a lock-and-key fit, though it should help matters that Collins has flashed some impressive range this season, shooting 36 percent from deep, mostly at the top of the key. Collins has added a nice pick-and-pop game to complement his devastating alley-oop threat. He’ll find himself in the P.J. Tucker role in the corners more often, but the Hawks can play around a bit in the second half of the season before Collins’ extension talks this summer.

    And we might not see much Collins and Capela this season. By trading Jabari Parker and Alex Len for former Hawks center Dewayne Dedmon (under contract through 2021-22) and two second-round picks, the Hawks acquired some insurance both now and in the future in case Capela’s foot problems prove to be more serious. Len’s presence was more redundant with Capela around, but Dedmon’s floor-spacing ability that he showed in his previous stint with Atlanta should be more useful next to the rim-running Collins.

    There was some talk that the Hawks were interested in Andre Drummond at the deadline, but Capela provides much more value on his contract. After this season, Capela is due $55.6 million over the next three seasons, for an average $18.7 million. Given the fact that Drummond’s market only netted a second-round pick at the deadline, I’d assume Drummond would be picking up his $28.8 million player option this summer for next season. To me, Capela is a better fit defensively, even with the worries about his health.

    Los Angeles Clippers

    I like the addition of Marcus Morris, especially on the price that they got him -- Moe Harkless and a 2020 first-round pick. Not only does Morris add to the Clippers’ core of talented wings, but they kept him away from their Staples Center roommates in purple and gold. That’s not nothing.

    In an ironic twist, I think there’s a tiny chance he could be this year’s Tobias Harris -- a former No. 1 option big wing who struggles to find his role on a contender midseason. Last year, it was the Clippers who dealt Harris (for a far tastier haul), and now, they’re adding Morris, who is shooting 43.9 percent from 3-point land -- way over his previous career rate of 36 percent. Even if he regresses a bit, Morris will be another body to throw at LeBron James and keep Kawhi Leonard and Paul George fresh for the long haul. All things considered, the Clippers have to feel good about their work on Thursday.

    Losers

    Cleveland Cavaliers

    Something went wrong here. It had to have. A Tristan Thompson deal fell through at the last minute, right? The Cavs couldn’t possibly think that Kevin Love, Drummond and Thompson can play in the same frontcourt. Right???

    I don’t know what the Cavs are doing with Thompson. According to Yahoo! Sports’ and friend of the program Chris Haynes, Thompson is not a buyout candidate. As of now. That may change. But this is one of the more befuddling transactions of the season. Perhaps the Cavs thought that a measly second-round pick was too good to pass up for Drummond. But in that case, why couldn’t they find a taker for Thompson?

    Now, the Cavs have potentially two unhappy veterans in Thompson and Love. If there’s a plan in place, I don’t see it. But hey, championship banners fly forever.

    2020 free agents

    Of all the parties involved at the trade deadline, Brandon Ingram, Andre Drummond and DeMar DeRozan could be the most disappointed of all. Cap space evaporated on Thursday. Atlanta did have two max slots, but now it only has one after its deadline moves. Memphis decided to chew up all its cap space in the deal with Miami to get Justise Winslow. If Cleveland doesn’t re-sign Drummond, where does he get his big payday? DeMar DeRozan may just pick up his player option for $28.8 million next season rather than test the market.

    As of now, only five teams project to have cap space this summer, per salary cap guru Jeff Siegel. Of those, only three will have max slots -- Atlanta, New York and Detroit. There will be some sign-and-trade options that can open up the market for some of these guys, but Draymond Green, Buddy Hield and Eric Gordon were wise to lock in extensions when they did.

    Golden State Warriors

    As I wrote in an expanded piece on Thursday, I’m not a huge fan of the Andrew Wiggins deal, but I get the allure of Wiggins. Many doubted keeping Klay Thompson over Kevin Love in 2014, and that turned out pretty good for the Warriors.

    Follow me on Twitter (@TomHaberstroh), and bookmark NBCSports.com/Haberstroh for my latest stories and videos and subscribe to the Habershow podcast.