Tyler Bilodeau

Developmental big. Carried by perimeter defense (72nd); the question marks are rim protection (3rd) and rebounding (22nd).

Draft outlook

Where the math lands them

Scouting summary

Developmental big profile. The loudest scout signal: elite bpm (BPM = 90th pct). Their NCAA dominance composite lands at 71 on a 100 scale. Mock consensus pegs them 57th across 2 boards.

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

58 / 100 two-way score

Bilodeau'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 Bilodeau.

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

1. 1Justin Harper2011

   top 1%

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

   Became: Fringe NBA · -0.2 career VORP · 22 g

   College: Richmond '11 · TS 64.2 · BPM 7.1

   Weight228 lbvs228 lbHt6'7"vs6'8"Reach107.0"vs106.0"Wing84.8"vs83.8"PORPAG4.9vs4.9USG%23.7vs24.7AST%7.4vs8.9TS%65.6vs64.2BPM5.6vs7.1
2. 2Richaun Holmes2015

   top 1%

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

   Became: Starter · 5.0 career VORP · 489 g

   College: Bowling Green '15 · TS 62.3 · BPM 8.0

   Ht6'7"vs6'8"Wing84.8"vs85.5"Reach107.0"vs108.0"Weight228 lbvs243 lbAST%7.4vs7.2Age22.2vs21.7USG%23.7vs25.1BPM5.6vs8.0TS%65.6vs62.3PORPAG4.9vs3.5
3. 3TJ Leaf2017

   top 1%

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

   Became: Rotation player · 0.1 career VORP · 146 g

   College: UCLA '17 · TS 66.0 · BPM 8.0

   Reach107.0"vs107.0"Ht6'7"vs6'9"Weight228 lbvs222 lbWing84.8"vs83.0"PORPAG4.9vs4.8TS%65.6vs66.0USG%23.7vs21.5BPM5.6vs8.0AST%7.4vs13.2
4. 4Ed Davis2010

   top 2%

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

   Became: Starter · 6.2 career VORP · 722 g

   College: North Carolina '10 · TS 60.7 · BPM 7.5

   Weight228 lbvs227 lbWing84.8"vs84.0"Reach107.0"vs108.0"Ht6'7"vs6'9"AST%7.4vs6.8USG%23.7vs21.5BPM5.6vs7.5Age22.2vs21.1TS%65.6vs60.7PORPAG4.9vs3.1
5. 5Chimezie Metu2018

   top 2%

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

   Became: Rotation player · 0.3 career VORP · 260 g

   College: USC '18 · TS 57.4 · BPM 5.1

   Wing84.8"vs84.5"Ht6'7"vs6'9"Reach107.0"vs108.0"Weight228 lbvs220 lbBPM5.6vs5.1USG%23.7vs25.1AST%7.4vs10.0Age22.2vs21.3PORPAG4.9vs3.5TS%65.6vs57.4

How the closest comps turned out

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

The 15 nearest blended comps. These are the comps' own careers — a range of what the profile has become before, not a projection of Bilodeau.

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

31 games· 30.2 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.