Nick Boyd

Lead playmaker. Carried by shot creation (89th) and passing (69th); the question marks are perimeter defense (2nd) and rim protection (3rd).

Draft outlook

Where the math lands them

Projected landing

#55

New York Knicks

2nd round

Model vs the field

The One

#55

vs

Field

#64

In line with the field — our board and the consensus agree within a couple of slots.

across 2 mock boards

Scouting summary

Lead playmaker profile. The loudest scout signal: elite bpm (BPM = 99th pct). Their NCAA dominance composite lands at 87 on a 100 scale. Mock consensus pegs them 64th across 2 boards.

Auto-generated from archetype + top deterministic chip · long-form narrative ships when the generator's AI pass is enabled.

41 / 100 two-way score

Boyd's offensive + defensive efficiency vs the 2026 class, per Synergy possessions.

Closest NBA comparisons

Matched on combine measurements (length, frame, explosion, agility) and college production (BPM, TS%, usage, assists), within position group. Each comp's tag shows which basis drove it; the college production + career outcome shown belongs to the comp, never projected onto Boyd.

“Top X%” = closer to Boyd than (100−X)% of all drafted guards on the measurables + production; the bar shows relative closeness among these 5.

1. 1Monte Morris2017

   top 2%

   measurables + production · matched on 9 of 9 measurables · 6 of 4 production

   Became: Starter · 5.6 career VORP · 426 g

   College: Iowa St. '17 · TS 55.5 · BPM 9.7

   Weight176 lbvs175 lbReach96.0"vs96.5"Ht6'1"vs6'1"Agility10.78svs11.00sWing74.5"vs76.0"Shuttle3.06svs3.20sMax vert36.0"vs33.5"Std vert30.5"vs28.0"¾ sprint3.07svs3.19sPORPAG5.8vs6.0AST%28.8vs32.0BPM7.8vs9.7TS%58.8vs55.5USG%30.1vs23.8Age25.2vs22.0
2. 2Javon Small2025

   top 1%

   measurables + production · matched on 9 of 9 measurables · 6 of 4 production

   Became: Too early to grade · 0.6 career VORP · 41 g

   College: West Virginia '25 · TS 57.6 · BPM 8.6

   Reach96.0"vs96.0"Agility10.78svs10.70s¾ sprint3.07svs3.10sHt6'1"vs6'1"Shuttle3.06svs2.90sWing74.5"vs76.8"Weight176 lbvs190 lbStd vert30.5"vs33.0"Max vert36.0"vs40.5"BPM7.8vs8.6TS%58.8vs57.6PORPAG5.8vs5.4USG%30.1vs28.7AST%28.8vs35.1Age25.2vs22.5
3. 3Marcus Zegarowski2021

   top 1%

   measurables + production · matched on 9 of 9 measurables · 6 of 4 production

   Became: Never reached the NBA · 0 g

   College: Creighton '21 · TS 60.0 · BPM 6.4

   Reach96.0"vs96.0"Wing74.5"vs74.8"Max vert36.0"vs35.5"Std vert30.5"vs30.0"Weight176 lbvs181 lb¾ sprint3.07svs3.11sHt6'1"vs6'1"Shuttle3.06svs3.26sAgility10.78svs11.47sTS%58.8vs60.0BPM7.8vs6.4AST%28.8vs23.9PORPAG5.8vs4.7Age25.2vs22.9USG%30.1vs23.3
4. 4Ray McCallum2013

   top 2%

   measurables + production · matched on 9 of 9 measurables · 5 of 4 production

   Became: Rotation player · -0.4 career VORP · 154 g

   College: Detroit Mercy '13 · TS 56.6 · BPM 6.3

   Std vert30.5"vs30.5"Shuttle3.06svs3.08sAgility10.78svs10.82sReach96.0"vs96.5"Wing74.5"vs75.3"Ht6'1"vs6'0"Weight176 lbvs191 lbMax vert36.0"vs40.0"¾ sprint3.07svs3.25sPORPAG5.8vs5.2TS%58.8vs56.6BPM7.8vs6.3AST%28.8vs23.5USG%30.1vs24.4
5. 5Kendall Williams2014

   top 1%

   measurables + production · matched on 8 of 9 measurables · 5 of 4 production

   Became: Never reached the NBA · 0 g

   College: New Mexico '14 · TS 59.2 · BPM 7.4

   Agility10.78svs10.83sHt6'1"vs6'2"Weight176 lbvs183 lbShuttle3.06svs2.85sMax vert36.0"vs33.0"Reach96.0"vs99.0"Wing74.5"vs77.5"Std vert30.5"vs27.0"AST%28.8vs28.7TS%58.8vs59.2BPM7.8vs7.4PORPAG5.8vs4.8USG%30.1vs23.5

How the closest comps turned out

Median outcome: Fringe — the typical case among these comps, between the floor and ceiling.

The 15 nearest blended comps (2 too recent to grade). These are the comps' own careers — a range of what the profile has become before, not a projection of Boyd.

via BartTorvik · percentiles vs G-bucket of all D1 history (2008-26)

35 games· 31.9 mpg

per-game · via barttorvik · percentiles vs all D1 2008-25 at the position

Raw per-game counts — not pace-adjusted; ranked against an 18-season D1 reference where elite-tier percentiles are stable across the window.