I still remember the excitement buzzing through the basketball community back in 2017 when the NBA draft approached. Having followed basketball analytics for over a decade, I've always found draft odds particularly fascinating—they're this beautiful intersection of statistics, potential, and pure gut feeling. The 2017 draft class was especially intriguing because it came during a period when the league was transitioning toward positionless basketball, making player evaluations more complex than ever before. What made this draft particularly memorable for me was how the odds shifted dramatically in the final weeks leading up to the event, reflecting the genuine uncertainty surrounding the top picks.
Looking back at the data, Markelle Fultz was consistently the favorite to go first overall, with most sportsbooks giving him around -250 odds to be selected first. As someone who'd watched countless hours of college basketball that season, I had my doubts—his shooting mechanics concerned me, though I never imagined his career would unfold as it did. The Philadelphia 76ers ultimately took him, betting on his combination of size and playmaking that had scouts raving. What's interesting is that Lonzo Ball, despite all the media attention surrounding his family, actually had fluctuating odds throughout the process, ranging from +300 to +600 for the second pick. I remember thinking the Lakers were making a mistake passing on De'Aaron Fox, who had torched Ball in their college matchup, but Los Angeles clearly valued Ball's unique passing vision and defensive length.
The third pick is where things got really interesting from a betting perspective. Jayson Tatum wasn't consistently in the top-three conversation until much later in the process, with Josh Jackson often appearing as the favorite for that spot. Boston's decision to trade down and still get Tatum was, in my professional opinion, one of the smartest draft maneuvers of the past decade. His offensive polish was clearly special, though I'll admit even I underestimated how quickly he'd develop into a superstar. The Celtics had him at about +400 to be taken third overall in the weeks leading up to the draft, which in retrospect was incredible value.
This discussion about hosting duties and venues actually reminds me of how the draft location itself can influence the atmosphere. The 2017 draft was held at Barclays Center in Brooklyn, but the reference to UST hosting Season 79 in 2016 makes me think about how different environments can affect these young players. There's something about the pressure of walking across that stage—whether it's at Plaza Mayor or Barclays Center—that separates prospects who are mentally prepared from those who aren't. Donovan Mitchell, who went 13th to the Jazz, is a perfect example of someone who embraced that pressure immediately, whereas some higher picks seemed overwhelmed by the moment.
When we examine the actual performance versus draft position, the 2017 class has proven particularly fascinating. While Fultz went first overall, the player with the best career to date—and this is my personal opinion—has been Tatum, followed closely by Bam Adebayo at pick 14. The Heat selecting Adebayo there was pure genius, and I've always respected Pat Riley's eye for talent. Meanwhile, players like Josh Jackson (4th) and Frank Ntilikina (8th) haven't panned out as expected, which just goes to show how unpredictable the draft can be despite all the analytics and scouting reports we rely on.
Reflecting on the betting markets for that draft, the most valuable odds in hindsight were probably on Donovan Mitchell going in the lottery at around +200 and Derrick White being selected in the first round at +350. These are the kinds of value picks that separate casual observers from serious analysts. I remember specifically telling colleagues that Mitchell's athletic testing scores were being undervalued, while White's two-way potential at Colorado was obvious to anyone who'd watched him closely.
The legacy of the 2017 draft continues to shape how teams approach player evaluation today. We've seen organizations place greater emphasis on wingspan measurements and defensive versatility after seeing players like OG Anunoby (pick 23) outperform his draft position. Personally, I believe we'll look back at this draft class as a turning point where teams started prioritizing modern skills over traditional positional fits. The success of players like Jarrett Allen (pick 22) and John Collins (pick 19) further reinforced that athletic big men who could switch defensively held more value than traditional back-to-the-basket centers.
As I analyze draft classes years later, the 2017 group stands out for its depth and the lessons it taught about player development. The difference between picks 1-5 and 15-20 proved much smaller than anticipated, which has led teams to be more willing to trade down in recent years. What fascinates me most is how the pre-draft odds reflected genuine uncertainty rather than clear consensus—a rarity in modern NBA drafts where information is so abundant. This uncertainty created tremendous value for astute observers, something I've carried with me in evaluating subsequent draft classes. The 2017 NBA draft odds ultimately told a story of potential versus performance, reminding us that even the most carefully calculated probabilities can't capture the human element of basketball development.