2016 NBA Draft Lottery: Recruiting review

The NBA Draft is only one month away. National Basketball analyst Eric Bossi takes a look at the 11 players projected by Yahoo Sports! THE VERTICAL and Draft Express to be picked in the Lottery portion of the first round that he scouted in high school. Bossi looks back on the first and last time he saw players like Brandon Ingram in high school and offers his take on their draft status.

First evaluation: It was December of 2011 at the High School OT Invitational in Raleigh, N.C. Ingram was probably only about 6-foot-6 at the time, was pretty slow and couldn’t have weighed more than 150 pounds. But he could really shoot and that with his long arms and baby face just screamed prospect.

Last evaluation: My final in-person look at Ingram was during the 2015 McDonald’s All-American festivities. I thought at the time that he was a legitimate candidate for top player in the class but didn’t want to let a few workouts hold more importance than a full body of work (which is funny when you get to my reasoning for dropping Ben Simmons). The diverse skill and ability to score off the dribble or from deep that could get him drafted No. 1 was on display.

Draft take: I can see why many now have Ingram slotted No. 1. He has NBA range, is much better with the dribble than given credit for and still has upside.

First evaluation: It was June of 2012 at the Pangos All-American Camp in Long Beach, Calif., and Simmons' ability was obvious. In his first appearance in the States he showed skill and athleticism that made it clear he was an elite prospect.

Last evaluation: Just like Ingram, my last viewing of Simmons was at the 2015 McDonald’s festivities. He wasn’t aggressive and didn’t seem like he wanted to be there much of the time. Frankly, his performance there left a little bit of a sour taste in my mouth and looking back I made too much of it, as it was a huge factor in me dropping him to No. 2 overall in 2015.

Draft take: After missing on him out of high school I’m hesitant to think he’s below somebody in the draft, but I agree with Ingram at No. 1 over Simmons. I still worry about how much Simmons wants to compete on a nightly basis and players who frequently appear bored -- at any level -- make me nervous.

First evaluation: I’m pretty sure I first saw Brown as an eighth grader in the spring of 2011, but it was a brief glimpse and it was actually teammate Daniel Giddens who made the bigger impression. The first time I could really evaluate Brown was in July of 2012 at the Reebok Breakout Challenge. He was only 6-foot-4 then but was a tough, athletic prospect who showed tremendous promise as a wing slasher.

Last evaluation: Brown is another who I last saw at the McDonald’s game in 2015. By then he’d really filled out his body, was superb driving to the rim and was still working to develop his ball handling.

Draft take: Given the premium currently being placed on skill and shooting, No. 4 overall as projected seems like it might be a little high. His one season at Cal was impressive in stretches, but his jumper remains in question and his ball handling is relatively shaky for a wing projected to go so highly who doesn’t have extraordinary size.

First evaluation: By today’s standards, Dunn was a late bloomer. I didn’t first see him until April of his junior season during an event in Little Rock, Ark. I immediately loved his size, athleticism and defensive potential.

Last evaluation: My last time seeing Dunn in high school was March of 2012 for the McDonald’s All American game. What I saw a year earlier still held true and he earned his No. 1 point guard in class of 2012 status.

Draft take: In my eyes he’s the best point guard in the draft, so a projection of No. 5 seems appropriate. However, he’s another that worries me a little bit as a jump shooter given the direction of play in the NBA.

First evaluation: My first look at Murray came courtesy of a game film from the 2013 Jordan Brand Classic International game. At the time he was slotted as a class of 2016 prospect (he later moved to 2015), and his jump shooting and size for a combo guard made him an elite talent.

Last evaluation: I had the opportunity to see Murray several times during the 2014-15 high school season. Others were focused on his position - is he a point guard or a shooting guard? I was focused on his skilled scoring and sturdy frame and letting that argument shake out later.

Draft take: The way Murray shoots the ball, I prefer him more as a two guard than a point. But he can play either position and looks appropriately slotted at No. 6 because of his skill on the offensive side of the ball.

First evaluation: I drove out to Bel Aire, Kan. to watch Hield workout at Sunrise Academy back in November of 2010. He was still very new to the United States at the time and my impression was that he was a bit wild, had a very funky jumper and he looked like an upper end mid-major to lower end high-major prospect.

Last evaluation: Watching Hield at Sunrise as a senior, he looked like a clear Big 12 level player and somebody that would start multiple years and score points at Oklahoma as he cleaned up his jumper.

Draft take: Back in 2010, I would have laughed in your face for suggesting Hield would some day be projected as the No. 7 pick in the draft. Not that he couldn’t play, but he was such a drastically different player. The way he’s cleaned up his jump shot is what impresses me the most.

First evaluation: After seeing plenty of sophomore season film, I first saw Labissiere in person during April of 2013. He was skinny, moved with fluidity, showed touch as a jump shooter and blocked shots. However, it was a few months later at the NBPA Top 100 Camp when he outplayed Karl-Anthony Towns head to head -- using his length to bug Towns jump shooting -- that I really thought he could potentially be the top player in the class of 2015.

Last evaluation: I was able to see Labissiere play a few times as a senior with the ill-conceived Reach Your Dreams Prep. He showed off lots of skill, shot jumpers and often times acted as a point guard for a team that had nobody else near his talent level. While all of that was nice, looking back I was a little blinded by him doing things he would never be asked to do at a higher level of basketball.

Draft take: Given that we ranked him No. 1 over Ben Simmons out of high school, I would love to see Labissiere prove worthy of being picked where he’s projected at No. 8. However, there’s a full year of film on him from Kentucky that seems to be getting ignored in favor of jump shots taken against bright orange and 12 inch tall defenders in workouts. I do think he’s eventually going to be a good NBA player, but I expect it to take some time.

First evaluation: It was Michigan-based scout Steve Bell who gave me a tip to check out Davis in October of 2013, early in Davis’ junior year. Based on film I was able to gather I was glad he did. I didn’t finally see him in person until the spring of 2014 but his athleticism, length and high upside made him a potential five-star prospect.

Last evaluation: By the time I saw Davis at the 2015 McDonald’s game, he was a five-star. However, he was slow to pick up basic drills in practice and looked like he was a year or two away from being a big producer at Michigan State. Because of that, he was dropped back to four-star (the highest ranked one at No. 26 overall), and like Simmons it was a case where I foolishly gave three days of workouts more importance than a previous year of evaluation.

Draft take: From an NBA standpoint, Davis is still pretty raw and he has to get stronger, so a projection of No. 9 looks a little high. But when you look at the rest of the draft, he’s got the upside to justify being a top-10 pick.

First evaluation: My first viewing of Chriss was in June of 2013 at the Pangos All-American Camp. He was skinny and lacked physicality, but he had a nice looking shooting stroke, grabbed rebounds on both ends of the floor and showed a tremendous ability to explode off the floor in tight quarters.

Last evaluation: The last time I saw Chriss I watched online as he struggled mightily with foul trouble (something that is still a big issue) during a playoff loss in March of his senior season. He showcased legitimate NBA athleticism and more promise as a jump shooter, but I thought his lack of strength and propensity to foul would really hamper him as a freshman.

Draft take: In an ideal world, Chriss would be back at Washington to get stronger and cut down on his fouling. But this is the real world where his athleticism, upside and relative youth (he's still only 18 years old) make him a lottery pick. I watched the Huskies a lot during his freshman season and would probably be willing to take him at No. 11 where he’s projected.

First evaluation: I first saw Valentine in July of 2012 playing for the Michigan Mustangs in Las Vegas. I thought he was a pretty clear call as a four-star prospect because of his feel for the game and competitive fire. I did have some worries about him as an athlete and a jump shooter. He made open shots, but I wondered about his ability to create space in the Big Ten.

Last evaluation: I didn’t get to see Valentine in person as a senior, but I was able to watch as he rolled to a state championship. His jumper looked much more clean, he was getting space to shoot easier and his playmaking skills were undeniable even if he wasn’t an overwhelming athlete. I really thought I had him pegged well in the rankings based on what I had seen.

Draft take: Valentine will most likely get dinged by some because he isn’t a jaw-dropping athlete. My days of worrying about that with him are done. His skill and feel supersede any lack of athleticism and I really like him as a pick at the tail end of the lottery.

First evaluation: My first look at Ellenson came in July of 2011 when I watched him and Minnesota Pump ‘N Run lose to the Las Vegas Prospects in the 15U finals of the Adidas Super 64. At the time I thought he was a center with good touch, skill and a great body to build on.

Last evaluation: By the time I saw Ellenson at the Timberwolves Shootout with his high school team in January of 2015, I was looking at him in a completely different way. With his size, skill facing the hoop, ability to create a shot and rebounding ability I thought he looked like a baby Antoine Walker.

Draft take: In high school and college Ellenson has been a true “feels like leather” shot selection guy who shoots anytime he’s got something that feels like leather in his hand. He has the talent to go No. 13 as projected and I like his toughness. But he has to learn to recognize better shots so he doesn’t let them fly to the detriment of his shooting percentages.