NBA Draft Lottery Simulation: Five Scenarios to Watch

Thinking through possible outcomes for the 2022 NBA draft lottery.

We’re a week away from lottery night—May 17—so it’s once again time to fire up the machine and do some thinking. This is the third annual edition of this column, which leans on Tankathon’s venerable lottery simulation tool to help envision some potential scenarios and dynamics that could affect the eventual flow of the draft. I didn’t keep track of all the simulations I ran (trust me, you don’t want to know), but I eventually landed on five options that illustrated a wide-yet-feasible range of possibilities. For the sake of realism, I included winning scenarios for the four teams with the best odds, and a fifth, more chaotic option at the end.

I’m not going to waste space breaking down individual prospects at length here—check out the Big Board for that—but contextualizing some of the potential fits and tough decisions at different junctures in the lottery can be valuable. This is more of a thought exercise than a formal mock draft, so try to keep an open mind as far as what’s possible relative to whatever the public groupthink about the draft might suggest. Let’s dive in.

Matt Pendleton/USA TODAY Sports

Scenario I: The Rockets win

1. Rockets: Jabari Smith

2. Thunder: Chet Holmgren

3. Magic: Paolo Banchero

4. Pistons: Jaden Ivey

5. Pacers: Keegan Murray

6. Trail Blazers: Shaedon Sharpe

7. Kings: Ben Mathurin

8. Pelicans (from Lakers): Dyson Daniels

9. Spurs: Johnny Davis

10. Wizards: Jalen Duren

11. Knicks: A.J. Griffin

12. Thunder (from Clippers): Jeremy Sochan

13. Hornets: Mark Williams

14. Cavaliers: Malaki Branham

• Let’s start with a relatively chalky outcome: here, the Rockets convert on their 14% chance of winning the lottery, the Thunder leap from No. 4 to No. 2, the Magic and Pistons each move down one spot, and everything else holds true, with nobody moving into the top four.

• As things stand, I feel pretty good about Jabari Smith Jr. being the top pick. In brief, he’s the youngest of the top four prospects (he turns 19 on Friday), he’s the best jump shooter of that group and likely always will be, teams love his competitive makeup, and his skill set is easy to envision immediately fitting onto anyone’s roster. As a philosophical rule of thumb, I generally think that when it’s a close call between two prospects early in the draft, you almost always take the better shooter. Smith shoots a repeatable ball and plays with no fear of missing, traits that all great jump shooters possess, and things that often take normal players years to figure out, if they ever do. Teams are also going to love Smith’s intangibles: he cares a ton, he’s a technical worker with a great approach to the game, his teammates love him, he loves his teammates, and he constantly took and made big shots for Auburn in games that mattered. I think the narrative circulating that Smith will never be the No. 1 scoring option on a good team is premature and reductive—he’s a special prospect with an incredible base of skills to build on. He’s not coming into the league with a great handle, but that will be an obvious and immediate point of emphasis for him, and he’s frankly never needed it to be dominant. At the rate he’s improved, I’d guess he gradually adds a more wing-like skillset. A creative coach will help unlock him right away, and there’s no reason he can’t be used as a pick-and-pop scorer like LaMarcus Aldridge to get comfortable, easy shots in the short term. I digress. I’d make an educated guess that the majority of teams will be most comfortable with him at No. 1. I understand the concerns some people have, but there should be little to no anxiety over taking Smith at the top, and he fits neatly on the Rockets as a partner for Jalen Green, a potentially dynamic shot-creator if he learns to be efficient.

• I wouldn’t jump to conclusions on how 2-3-4 might fall: it’s relatively close for me between Holmgren, Banchero and Ivey, which echoes the pulse of the NBA at the moment. The Thunder are one of the most logical destinations for Holmgren (more on that shortly), Banchero fits better than Ivey on the guard-heavy Magic, and Ivey then goes to Detroit in this scenario.

• On the subject of Ivey and the Pistons, there’s a chance Detroit has a really tough decision to make if it ends up with a very high selection. He’s No. 2 on my Big Board, and I think there’s a pretty strong argument that his upside is the second-highest in the draft, although there’s plenty of risk built in. Pistons boss Troy Weaver played a big role in the Thunder selecting Russell Westbrook in 2008, and Ivey is a similar type of athletic downhill guard who can punish teams when given space to attack. Here, at No. 4, it’s worth chancing it, but how you feel about the match depends on how you feel about pairing Ivey with Cade Cunningham. The optimistic argument is that Cunningham is in essence a basketball chameleon: he’s big, smart and skilled enough to play almost any role on the floor and make teammates better. He’s also an alpha leader whose presence would take pressure off of Ivey to be a lead playmaker, and also likely set him up for better scoring opportunities. Having a second playmaker to bend defenses with speed rather than guile might make it much easier for Cunningham solve his efficiency struggles. And, objectively Detroit’s roster could stand to become much more athletic moving forward, considering who its young players are. On the flipside, you could argue that taking the ball out of Cunningham’s hands might be a developmental negative. The league is skewing toward multiple-handler offenses, so having him share touches with Ivey shouldn’t be a disaster or anything, but one could argue it might inhibit both players from reaching their ceiling as playmakers. Personally, I’d be intrigued: I think Ivey needs a steady hand next to him to help stabilize his play, and conversely, Cunningham has never been paired with a dynamic backcourt driver like Ivey. Regardless, the odds are that the Pistons will come to understand the potential dynamic better than anyone else. With apologies to Killian Hayes, the thought of a Cunningham-Ivey duo fascinates me to the point where I want to pencil Ivey in as a priority here. Moving on.

Troy Wayrynen/USA TODAY Sports

Scenario II: The Thunder win, the Kings move up

1. Thunder: Chet Holmgren

2. Magic: Jabari Smith

3. Pistons: Jaden Ivey

4. Kings: Shaedon Sharpe

5. Rockets: Paolo Banchero

6. Pacers: Keegan Murray

7. Trail Blazers: Dyson Daniels

8. Pelicans (from Lakers): Johnny Davis

9. Spurs: Jeremy Sochan

10. Wizards: Ben Mathurin

11. Knicks: Jalen Duren

12. Thunder: A.J. Griffin

13. Hornets: Mark Williams

14. Cavaliers: Malaki Branham

• In this version of the sim, the Thunder’s 12.5% odds of winning the lottery convert. The Magic and Pistons then leapfrog the Rockets, and the Kings leap from No. 7 to No. 4 (hitting on an 8.5% chance). Despite having the league’s worst record, Houston drops out of the top five (it can pick no lower than fifth). Everything else holds.

• If there’s one team I could fully envision opting for Holmgren over Smith at No. 1, it’s the Thunder, so let’s play that scenario out. He’s not the player I’d personally prefer at the very top, but if there’s anyone who might, it’s probably Sam Presti. OKC is no stranger to big swings and in essence has a longer runway to rebuild than any team in the league. Presti has a ton of job security and the freedom to take on risk as he sees fit, heavily bolstered by the fact that the Thunder currently hold a potential 17 (!) first-round picks in the next five drafts, including three this year. So while Smith might be more appealing to many, consider the circumstances, that OKC sorely needs to bolster its interior defense, and that it can be patient, and Holmgren could be a match here. Holmgren’s high-end outcome as a mobile rim protector who plays on the perimeter on offense is pretty appealing. Where you’d actually draft him depends on how confident you are that everything translates despite his strength disadvantage and how much scoring upside you envision in the long run. Holmgren is a very good defensive prospect who should make an impact as a roving shot-blocker, and he’s likely going to shoot capably, allowing him to blend and enhance different types of lineups. But there are going to be situations where he’s physically overmatched, particularly on the offensive end, and teams will need to help him add muscle while maintaining his mobility. Regardless, his size, skill level and defensive prowess are unique in tandem, and for the Thunder, who are in no hurry to contend, Holmgren may be more appealing than Smith.

• Could Paolo Banchero actually fall all the way to No. 5? Maybe not. But it’s worth thinking about in conjunction with the notion that the Kings moving up would likely create a huge inflection point in the draft. There’s a 32% chance Sacramento leaps from No. 7 and grabs one of the top four picks. Consider the state of the Kings’ roster: their centerpiece, De’Aaron Fox, is a ball-dominant point guard, and they went in big to acquire Domantas Sabonis, an offense-first power forward who needs touches and doesn’t protect the basket. It’s easy enough to see Smith or Holmgren as matches here, but Ivey and Banchero would be poor situational fits from a role/player development perspective. So it’s worth at least entertaining the idea that another prospect could crash the top four in scenarios like this. For the Kings, this type of situation where they move up and Ivey or Banchero is on the board would create obvious trade-back possibilities.

• If there’s a prospect who can crash the top four, I’d keep an eye on Sharpe, who is probably going to dazzle teams in workout settings and has a legitimate argument, muted primarily by the fact he didn’t play college basketball. He’s one of the best athletes in the whole draft, and there’s not much he isn’t capable of. But Sharpe is a scorer first and second, and there’s a leap of faith required that your player development staff will be able to help him iron out the rest. His upside is right there with some of these other guys, and if something like this happens where he makes significantly more sense for whoever picks fourth than one of the other options, I wouldn’t rule it out.

Jim Dedmon/USA TODAY Sports

Watch NBA games online all season long with fuboTV: Start with a 7-day free trial!

Scenario III: The Magic win, two teams move up

1. Magic: Jabari Smith

2. Rockets: Chet Holmgren

3. Pacers: Paolo Banchero

4. Trail Blazers: Jaden Ivey

5. Pistons: Shaedon Sharpe

6. Thunder: Keegan Murray

7. Kings: Ben Mathurin

8. Pelicans (from Lakers): Dyson Daniels

9. Spurs: Johnny Davis

10. Wizards: Jalen Duren

11. Knicks: A.J. Griffin

12. Thunder (from Clippers): Jeremy Sochan

13. Hornets: Mark Williams

14. Cavaliers: Malaki Branham

• Here we have the Magic converting on their top odds and flip-flopping with the Rockets. The Pacers hit on a 10.6% chance of picking third, and the Blazers on a 9.6% chance of picking fourth. The Pistons and Thunder each move down.

• No matter where Orlando picks, that roster is nearing some sort of crossroads, with a wide array of players under 25 in need of minutes as they get closer to their second contracts. Mo Bamba is a restricted free agent and Wendell Carter and Jonathan Isaac are on long-term deals. Would that preclude the Magic from taking a frontcourt player? Unlikely, also considering that Jaden Ivey doesn’t fit well with Markelle Fultz and/or Jalen Suggs in the backcourt. I’ve given them Smith here, considering they don’t have a shooter on the roster remotely close to his level and that, as previously mentioned, I think he’s the best prospect available. While one or two players are probably going to get squeezed out of the mix, Orlando’s front office has been willing to accumulate talent and let the minutes play out. The futures of Bamba and Isaac (who’s constantly injured) may or may not play a role in what the Magic would do here, but they’re each more broadly similar to Holmgren than Smith.

• While we’re here, it’s worth discussing what Houston might do at No. 2, with Smith off the board and all of Holmgren, Ivey and Banchero on the board. Ivey is not a great fit with Jalen Green, who’s going to have the keys to the Rockets’ offense for the foreseeable future, so I’d guess it narrows to the two bigs in this situation. I could see the argument for both, but if you treat Banchero and Holmgren as equals, Holmgren probably makes more sense for a roster that has little to no defensive backbone. He’d pair quite well as cover for Alperen Sengun in a way that Banchero won’t.

• The Pacers would likely be tempted by Ivey, an Indiana native, but the fit here is pretty ideal for a skilled big like Banchero, who is more broadly versatile than Domantas Sabonis was, and whose passing skills could really enhance the offense in tandem with Tyrese Haliburton. You could also make the argument that Ivey and Haliburton would be devastating together, but to be fair, we just saw some version of that in Sacramento, where Haliburton paired fine with De’Aaron Fox, but blossomed as the lead playmaker after the trade to Indiana. Obviously, this would be a good problem for the Pacers to have. I’d probably lean Banchero as the safer pick and better fit.

• That pushes Ivey down to the Trail Blazers, which raises a big question about what direction Portland should and will take with its roster moving forward. The party line seems to be that the Blazers will try and kick-start another playoff run around Damian Lillard. In reality, the tea leaves are much murkier. There’s very little of substance on the roster to support him in an increasingly deep West: Anfernee Simons, Jusuf Nurkic, Josh Hart and Joe Ingles are not enough. And while the Blazers will have some options in free agency and can certainly use this draft pick as a trade chip to improve the roster, what if this scenario happens, they move up, and Jaden Ivey is staring them in the face? Drafting one of the top bigs is a bit more palatable for the Blazers, who could trot out Smith, Holmgren or Banchero with their current group and realistically have some value added. It would be probably hard to pass on Ivey at four, even with Lillard and Simons on the roster, even if someone like Keegan Murray is more of a win-now pick, and even if there’s a palatable trade available. This all points to the question of whether it’s even worth Portland trying to make a run at being a play-in team next season. The value of whatever pick the Blazers land (and the players likely available to them) could end up dictating how quickly and in which direction they want to move. Objectively, it’s much easier to move on from No. 7 or No. 8 than a top-four selection in this draft.

Trevor Ruszkowski/ USA Today network

Scenario IV: Pistons win, Knicks (!) move up

1. Pistons: Jabari Smith

2. Knicks: Jaden Ivey

3. Thunder: Chet Holmgren

4. Rockets: Paolo Banchero

5. Magic: Shaedon Sharpe

6. Pacers: Keegan Murray

7. Trail Blazers: Dyson Daniels

8. Kings: Ben Mathurin

9. Pelicans (from Lakers): Johnny Davis

10. Spurs: Jeremy Sochan

11. Wizards: Jalen Duren

12. Thunder (from Clippers): A.J. Griffin

13. Hornets: Mark Wiliams

14. Cavaliers: Malaki Branham

• In this version, the Pistons’ top odds deliver at No. 1. More interestingly, the Knicks hit on their meager 2.2% chance of moving up to No. 2. Oklahoma City moved up from four to three, Houston dropped to four, and Orlando fell down to No. 5.

• Smith feels like a terrific fit in Detroit, which can immediately optimize his shooting in two-man situations with Cunningham and would have two massively versatile talents to build their roster around moving forward. Pairing a 6' 8" lead guard with a 6' 10" sharpshooter—both of whom are versatile defenders and intense competitors—would point the franchise in a really promising direction. I’m not going to overthink that one.

• If the Knicks somehow pulled this off, Ivey fits pretty well there at No. 2, with Banchero too analogous to Julius Randle and Holmgren a weird fit with the rest of their roster. New York badly needs a dynamic backcourt player to run offense, and Ivey would inject some much-needed energy into the franchise. The pressure of that stage would be a challenge for him, but it’s a pretty interesting thought, at least.

• We’ve talked about the top teams and their situations a bit already, so let’s briefly work down. The fits are good here for the Pacers (Keegan Murray is basically what their roster needs) and Blazers (Dyson Daniels is ready to contribute and fills a role they could use if they keep the pick). Working down the line, the Kings, Pelicans and Spurs are in pretty good spots to add talent, all three teams picking in a range of the draft I feel is really strong. Daniels, Johnny Davis and Jeremy Sochan are all players I feel strongly about, with Ben Mathurin another good option with a different skill set from the others. Jalen Duren, A.J. Griffin, and to a lesser extent, Mark Williams could be in play in the 8-10 range, but if I had to venture a guess, they’re more in the next group.

• As far as potential landing spots for bigs go, I’d keep an eye on the Spurs, the Wizards at No. 10, the Knicks (their pick most likely falling at No. 11) and the Hornets at No. 14. The Thunder’s second pick may be determined by what they do with their first pick, creating a bit of a swing spot in the lottery. It’s not a lock that Jalen Duren goes ahead of Mark Williams, who really helped himself over the course of the season, but at least for now, I’m operating that way when projecting out.

Scenario V: Weirdness erupts

1. Pelicans (from Lakers): Jabari Smith

2. Spurs: Chet Holmgren

3. Magic: Paolo Banchero

4. Pistons: Jaden Ivey

5. Rockets: Shaedon Sharpe

6. Thunder: Dyson Daniels

7. Pacers: Keegan Murray

8. Trail Blazers: Jeremy Sochan

9. Kings: Bennedict Mathurin

10. Wizards: Johnny Davis

11. Knicks: Jalen Duren

12. Thunder (from Clippers): Mark Williams

13. Hornets: A.J. Griffin

14. Cavaliers: Malaki Branham

• For the sake of entertainment, let’s look at this one, where the Pelicans and Spurs beat long odds and leap up to No. 1 and No. 2, pushing everyone else down a peg. The Magic moved down to No. 3 and the Pistons to No. 4, with Houston falling to its absolute floor at No. 5 as a result.

• Imagining Smith on the Pelicans spacing the floor for Zion Williamson in giant-sized lineups with Brandon Ingram and Herb Jones is pretty tantalizing, though unlikely. Similarly, Holmgren kind of fits what the Spurs have needed at power forward, and he’d wind up in a good starting point with shot-creators around him and Gregg Popovich guiding the early part of his career.

• Falling to No. 5 would, frankly, really suck for the Rockets. I gave them Sharpe here, but nobody on the board is a perfect fit. If Houston slips on lottery night, that may become something worth monitoring for trade possibilities. I gave them Sharpe here as an upside pick and another super-athlete in the backcourt, but I’m not entirely sure how he’d really fit with Jalen Green, honestly. This probably won't happen, but the Rockets picking fourth or fifth does come with some chaotic outcomes.

• For the sake of variety, I switched up some of the fits beginning with the Thunder at No. 6, giving them Daniels to pair with close friend Josh Giddey (and as a ripple effect, having them pick a big, Mark Williams, at No. 12). This handed Murray to the Pacers and sent Jeremy Sochan to the Blazers, where he fits their needs better than one of the guards. I’ve consistently had Mathurin to the Kings (they need wings and probably shouldn’t pair a non-shooting center with Sabonis), pushing Davis down to No. 10, where he becomes the best player available for the Wizards despite a weird fit with Bradley Beal. The Knicks then wind up with Duren as a replacement for Mitchell Robinson, and the Hornets are left without a developmental center yet again. You hate to see it!

Sports Illustrated may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.