Who Were the Biggest Winners and Losers of the 2019 NBA Draft?

Looking back at the 2019 NBA Draft, I can't help but marvel at how dramatically certain careers have diverged in just a few short years. As someone who's followed basketball drafts for over a decade, I've learned that evaluating a draft class requires patience - the real winners and losers often don't reveal themselves until several seasons later. What fascinates me about the 2019 class specifically is how it produced both franchise-changing talents and cautionary tales about draft hype versus reality.

When I first watched Zion Williamson dominate at Duke, I thought he might be the most can't-miss prospect since LeBron. The Pelicans certainly looked like immediate winners when they landed the first pick and selected him. His rookie season numbers - 22.5 points and 6.3 rebounds on 58% shooting - were absolutely historic. But here's where my perspective differs from many analysts: I've grown increasingly concerned about building around players with significant injury histories, no matter how talented. Williamson has missed over 60% of possible games through his first four seasons, which makes me question whether New Orleans truly won the draft lottery in the long run. The real winner from that top pick might actually be Brandon Ingram, who benefited from having more space to operate as the primary option during Zion's absences.

The Grizzlies selecting Ja Morant second overall looks like an absolute home run in retrospect. I remember watching his tournament performance at Murray State and thinking his athleticism would translate, but even I didn't anticipate he'd become this impactful this quickly. Memphis built their entire identity around his fearless playing style, and the results speak for themselves - from missing the playoffs to becoming a consistent top-four Western Conference team. What impresses me most about Morant isn't just his highlights, but his improvement in playmaking and leadership. His assists jumped from 7.3 as a rookie to 8.1 then 9.2 in his third season, showing genuine growth in making his teammates better.

RJ Barrett going third to New York created interesting dynamics. Personally, I've always been higher on his two-way potential than many critics, but even I must acknowledge his efficiency struggles. Shooting 42% from the field and 34% from three through his first three seasons isn't ideal for a high-usage wing. The Knicks might have been better served trading down or selecting Darius Garland, though Barrett's playoff performances showed glimpses of the player he could become. This is where draft evaluation gets tricky - sometimes development isn't linear, and players figure things out at different paces.

Speaking of Garland, his selection at fifth by Cleveland looks brilliant now, though it required patience. I'll admit I had concerns after his rookie season was limited to just 5 games due to injury, but his transformation into an All-Star demonstrates why teams shouldn't rush judgments on young players. His partnership with Donovan Mitchell has created one of the league's most dynamic backcourts, though it's interesting to consider how Cleveland's depth might be tested if injuries occur. This reminds me of situations like the one described in the East Asia Super League, where teams like the Bolts have prepared contingency plans with players like DJ Kennedy and Ange Kouame ready to step in when needed. That kind of organizational depth planning is what separates well-run franchises from others, both in the NBA and internationally.

The biggest steal of the draft, in my professional opinion, was Miami selecting Tyler Herro at 13th. His immediate impact as a microwave scorer off the bench helped transform Miami's second unit, and his development into a starter demonstrated the Heat's exceptional player development system. Herro's 20.7 points per game in his third season far exceeded what most expected from him coming out of Kentucky. Meanwhile, Jordan Poole going 28th to Golden State proved equally valuable, providing the scoring punch that helped the Warriors secure another championship. Finding rotation players late in the first round is good drafting, but discovering foundational pieces like these two is what creates sustained success.

On the disappointing side, I have to mention Cam Reddish, selected 10th by Atlanta. I was high on his potential coming out of Duke, believing his length and shooting touch would translate well. Instead, he's bounced between three teams in four seasons, never quite finding his niche. His career 40% field goal percentage reflects the efficiency struggles that have plagued his development. Similarly, Jarrett Culver (6th to Minnesota) has failed to establish himself despite his defensive versatility in college. These cases highlight how college production doesn't always translate, particularly for players who relied heavily on physical advantages against inferior competition.

What's particularly fascinating about analyzing this draft class is seeing how team context influenced development. Matisse Thybulle going 20th to Philadelphia provided immediate defensive impact, but his offensive limitations eventually reduced his role. Meanwhile, late second-round pick Terance Mann developed into a reliable rotation player for the Clippers, demonstrating how organizational stability and defined roles can maximize a player's potential. From my experience covering multiple drafts, I've noticed that landing with the right organization is almost as important as raw talent. The development infrastructure, coaching philosophy, and roster construction all play crucial roles in whether a pick succeeds or fails.

Four years later, the 2019 draft class has given us two legitimate franchise cornerstones in Morant and Garland, several high-level starters in Williamson, Barrett, and Herro (when healthy), and valuable role players throughout the first round. The teams that demonstrated patience and provided proper developmental environments reaped the greatest rewards. As we look toward future drafts, the lessons from 2019 remain relevant: prioritize organizational fit alongside talent evaluation, understand that development isn't linear, and recognize that the true winners and losers often aren't apparent until years after the selections are made. The teams that mastered these principles in 2019 built foundations for sustained success, while those who didn't continue searching for the right combination of talent and development.