2025 WNBA Mock Draft 6.0: Paige Bueckers goes to Wings at No. 1, but late Sky-Lynx trade shakes up first round

Getty Images

The first round of the 2025 WNBA Draft looks nothing like it did when the order was originally set back in November following the draft lottery. Since then, two lottery selections — Nos. 2 and 3 overall — and seven first-round picks have changed hands. 

The latest shake up occurred on Sunday when the Minnesota Lynx traded the No. 11 overall selection to the Chicago Sky in exchange for a 2026 first-round pick. Thanks to that deal, the Sky join the Washington Mystics, Connecticut Sun and Dallas Wings as teams with multiple first-round picks in this year’s draft. Together, those four teams control nine of the 12 first-round picks. 

Will that remain the case by the end of the night? Based on how the past few weeks and months have gone, it seems unlikely, and we could be in for a dramatic night on Monday. 

UConn star Paige Bueckers will go No. 1 overall to the Wings, but what happens after that remains to be seen. With just hours to go until showtime, here’s a look at what might happen with CBS Sports’ 2025 WNBA Mock Draft 6.0. 

1. Dallas Wings: Paige Bueckers — G, UConn

19.9 points, 4.4 rebounds, 4.6 assists, 2.1 steals | 53.4% FG, 41.9% 3FG, 88.9% FT

Bueckers’ storied college career ended on a high note when UConn beat South Carolina to win the national championship — the first of her career. One of the best prospects in recent memory, Bueckers is a franchise-changing talent, both on and off the court. She is going to be the No. 1 pick on Monday and will team up with Arike Ogunbowale to form a dynamic backcourt. It shouldn’t take long for her to make a major impact on the professional level. 

2. Seattle Storm: Dominique Malonga — C, France

18.5 points, 11 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 1.3 steals, 1.1 blocks | 53.1% FG, 63.3% FT

The Storm’s draft plans were all torn up when Olivia Miles decided to return to school. All is not lost, however, as they can still grab Malonga, who has the most upside outside of Bueckers in this class. Only 19 years old, Malonga led Lyon to the semifinals of EuroCup Women while averaging an efficient double-double. Standing 6-foot-6 and boasting a unique combination of athleticism and on-ball skills for a player of her size, she is a rare talent. 

WNBA Draft 2025: Introducing Dominique Malonga, the 6-foot-6 French phenom who could go as high as No. 2

3. Washington Mystics: Sonia Citron — G, Notre Dame

14.1 points, 5.4 rebounds, 2.7 assists, 1.9 steals | 48.4% FG, 37.2% 3FG, 89% FT

The Mystics are a big loser from the events of the past few weeks, as their options at Nos. 3 and 4 have changed drastically. The order with their two lottery picks doesn’t particularly matter, but Citron feels like a lock to wind up in D.C. She may not have the upside you’d prefer at this stage of the draft, but she seems destined for a long pro career thanks to her defensive versatility on the perimeter and spot-up shooting ability. 

4. Washington Mystics: Kiki Iriafen — F, USC

18 points, 8 rebounds, 1.8 assists | 49% FG, 81.1% FT

The Mystics’ roster isn’t screaming out for another power forward, but Iriafen is the best available player and they have to take her and figure everything else out later. She’s a good athlete with a smooth face-up game, who finishes well around the basket and defends. Ultimately, her ceiling likely hinges on whether she can develop a more consistent jumper and expand her range to the 3-point line. 

5. Golden State Valkyries: Justė Jocytė — G, Lithuania

12.1 points, 3 rebounds, 2.6 assists | 43% FG, 36.5% 3FG, 77.5% FT

The expansion draft showed that the Valkyries’ front office is comfortable with international players, despite the potential schedule conflicts that may arise. As they continue the process of building out their roster, they could take Jocytė with their first ever draft pick. The 19-year-old Lithuanian, who has been playing professionally since she was 14, is a big, crafty guard with slick playmaking skills and a smooth jumper. 

6. Washington Mystics: Shyanne Sellers — G, Maryland

14.4 points, 3.8 rebounds, 4.1 assists | 46.2% FG, 40.8% 3FG, 86.8% FT

The Mystics could certainly use some more backcourt help as they begin a rebuild, and Sellers would be a nice option there. She was inconsistent in the second half of the season for Maryland after returning from a knee sprain, but she has great size for a guard and can do a little bit of everything. Perhaps most notably, she made a big leap as a 3-point shooter, albeit on low volume. 

7. Connecticut Sun: Aneesah Morrow — F, LSU

18.7 points, 13.5 rebounds, 1.6 assists, 2.5 steals | 49% FG, 73.4% FT

Trying to project where Morrow will be drafted may be the only thing more difficult than trying to project how she’ll fare on a WNBA court. You cannot deny her production on the college level, especially her rebounding, but you also cannot ignore the fact that she’s undersized and shot 34.5% outside of the restricted area this season, per CBB Analytics. For the Sun, who are essentially a blank slate beyond this season and have multiple picks, it’s probably worth taking her and betting on the work ethic. 

8. Connecticut Sun: Ajša Sivka — F, Slovenia

11 points, 3.1 rebounds, 2.9 assists | 43.1% FG, 42.2% 3FG, 63.6% FT

For all the Sun have said about remaining competitive, this is going to be a multi-year rebuild, and getting an extra first-round pick via the Natasha Cloud trade gives them the flexibility to take a swing on a high-upside prospect like Sivka. The 6-foot-4 Slovenian is still only 19 and may end up being a draft-and-stash candidate as a result, but she’s a big wing who can really shoot. 

9. Los Angeles Sparks: Sarah Ashlee Barker — G, Alabama

18.2 points, 6.3 rebounds, 3.9 assists, 2 steals | 51.4% FG, 37.5% 3FG, 70.9% FT

Barker’s 45-point outing against Maryland was arguably the most impressive individual effort in the NCAA Tournament. She’s a big, versatile wing who has turned herself into a reliable shooter, particularly off the catch, and you’ll never doubt her effort or toughness. All of those traits would make her a good fit for the Sparks and new coach Lynne Roberts’ analytics-driven approach. 

10. Chicago Sky: Georgia Amoore — G, Kentucky

19.6 points, 2.3 rebounds, 6.9 assists | 42.3% FG, 33.6% 3FG, 83.7% FT

The Sky found their franchise bigs last year in Kamilla Cardoso and Angel Reese. Now, they need a point guard who can grow alongside them and make their lives easier. That’s Amoore, can easily create shots for herself and others, and finished third in the country in assists last season. There are some questions about her size (5-foot-6) and ability to hold up defensively, but she’s an electric offensive player and would have the perfect role model to learn from in Courtney Vandersloot

11. Chicago Sky: Saniya Rivers — G, NC State

11.9 points, 6.6 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 1.6 steals, 1.3 blocks | 41.9% FG, 27.2% 3FG, 67.4% FT

The Sky are back up again at No. 11 after their trade with the Lynx on Sunday. They clearly have a target in mind if they were willing to jump back into the first round, and it could be Rivers, who general manager Jeff Pagliocca talked up in a conference call with reporters last week. Pagliocca called Rivers “maybe the best athlete in the draft” and added, “she’s proven she can guard multiple positions, which always matters in our league.” Rivers’ offense is a major work in progress, but if she can figure some things out on that side of the ball, the upside is tremendous. 

12. Dallas Wings: Sania Feagin — F, South Carolina

8.1 points, 4.5 rebounds, 1.3 assists, 1.5 blocks | 60.1% FG, 79.7% FT

We’re doing some guesswork here with the Wings’ second first-round selection based on which players were invited to the green room, and which ones are already off the board in this mock. Of the remaining group, Feagin makes the most sense for the Wings. Her numbers don’t pop, but that says more about South Carolina’s depth than her talent. She’s a smart defender who would fit into the culture Chris Koclanes and Curt Miller are trying to build, and steadily improved each year in college. 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *