2026 NBA draft thread

[KillerLeft]

Oh, Flemings would be fantastic. But there would have to be a major headscratch reach for him to fall to 8th.

idk...that's probably right, and he probably won't make it that far. Hell, he might go 5th, for all I know. 

I'm just letting the mocks that have him as low as 7 get my hopes up a bit.

[mvossman]

Different angle on value: How far UP (if at all) could you trade by combining 8 and 30? Can you get to 7? 6? 5?

Probably case by case, depending on which teams own those picks and what they're looking to achieve, but "value chart" wise, what's the precedent?

I would think at most one spot.

[mvossman]

Oh, Flemings would be fantastic. But there would have to be a major headscratch reach for him to fall to 8th.

I think its possible.  I have seen Brown mocked in the top 7 due to his upside.  Not crazy to see Acuff/Wagler/Brown as the first three PGs off the board.

[Winter]

I think I'm on an island here, but if the Mavs pick #8 I'm all out praying Flemmings falls that far.

I really think the players discussed at this slot are all pretty good and may be sucessful even as starters, but they don't strike me as star quality at all. It almost seems like the Mavs could get their player at #8.... and it just wouldn't be all that much. Burries might just be another Max Christie. Brown and Flemings might just be C+. One of the biggest problems with the PGs potentially available is that there doesn't seem like much space between them. Even Philon might be lumped into that group.

Maybe the Mavs really like Aday Mara or Moritz and also think Philon is at least as good as the other PGs. Can you get both? That's the kind of thing I'd like to see. Maybe not exactly that, but something like that.

[KillerLeft]

I really think the players discussed at this slot are all pretty good and may be sucessful even as starters, but they don't strike me as star quality at all. It almost seems like the Mavs could get their player at #8.... and it just wouldn't be all that much. Burries might just be another Max Christie. Brown and Flemings might just be C+. One of the biggest problems with the PGs potentially available is that there doesn't seem like much space between them. Even Philon might be lumped into that group.

Maybe the Mavs really like Aday Mara or Moritz and also think Philon is at least as good as the other PGs. Can you get both? That's the kind of thing I'd like to see. Maybe not exactly that, but something like that.

I agree, but with Flemings, the combination of age, size, speed and quickness leads me to believe there MIGHT be something there more like the potential routinely assigned to the top 4. It's not there now, but I feel like it's a decent gamble, and I think his floor is something the Mavs desperately need, anyway.

[Scott41theMavs]

I really think the players discussed at this slot are all pretty good and may be sucessful even as starters, but they don't strike me as star quality at all. It almost seems like the Mavs could get their player at #8.... and it just wouldn't be all that much. Burries might just be another Max Christie. Brown and Flemings might just be C+. One of the biggest problems with the PGs potentially available is that there doesn't seem like much space between them. Even Philon might be lumped into that group.

Maybe the Mavs really like Aday Mara or Moritz and also think Philon is at least as good as the other PGs. Can you get both? That's the kind of thing I'd like to see. Maybe not exactly that, but something like that.

I've been beating this drum for a while. If you can't get Flemings or Acuff at 8 or 9 (and you can't), then the only way left to get the necessary impact out of this draft is to try to get two picks in the 11-20 range and grab two solid starter quality players.

[F Gump]

"Give them our #8 and our second-rounder. We get their #10 and #17."

That's not possible. The theory is that if you move down to 10 (from 8), you are likely to still have the same PG choices. But such a trade w OKC moves you all the way down to 12, not to 10.

That difference is HUGE. At 12, there's a greater-than-zero (more likely than not) that your PGs are all taken, and you don't get the pick of the bigger players either. If you don't like what's at 8, you REALLY won't like what's at 12.

[KillerLeft]

I've been beating this drum for a while. If you can't get Flemings or Acuff at 8 or 9 (and you can't), then the only way left to get the necessary impact out of this draft is to try to get two picks in the 11-20 range and grab two solid starter quality players.

I mean...it seems pretty likely that SOMEONE a lot of people here like would be there at #8. 

I don't think it's unreasonable to hope to get...idk...a Devin Harris level guy out of this draft?

[F Gump]

The solution is easy. Have the Mavs get picked in the lottery draw, where they get a player in the top 4.

I vote for that.

[Chicagojk]

I don't think Ament is a fit in Dallas.  I have major questions, but potentially could see him as one of the better players from this draft.  I was skimming through a Youtube draft and he had the Mavs at 8.   I believe he picked Brown at the spot, but asked if Dallas could gamble and pick Ament and then trade up in the first round for one of the middle first point guards.

[KillerLeft]

I don't think Ament is a fit in Dallas.  I have major questions, but potentially could see him as one of the better players from this draft.  I was skimming through a Youtube draft and he had the Mavs at 8.   I believe he picked Brown at the spot, but asked if Dallas could gamble and pick Ament and then trade up in the first round for one of the middle first point guards.

I haven't delved into Ament much yet. What's the beef with his fit? At a glance, he looks like a good combo of size and ball-handling. Maybe a little lacking in explosiveness, but very few players have everything.

[Chicagojk]

I haven't delved into Ament much yet. What's the beef with his fit? At a glance, he looks like a good combo of size and ball-handling. Maybe a little lacking in explosiveness, but very few players have everything.

He is going to need time.   He is pretty closer to regular freshman who will not step in and be a hit right away imo.   He was a top 5 recruit entering college.   6'10 kid who moves well and is skilled.  Some compare him to Rischacher.  

My big question are two things:  1) shooting.   He shot 33% from three this year.   Sam Vecenie said he shot 30% from three in AAU.    So, can he shoot.  His shot looks pretty smooth mid range but his three looks questionable.    

2) Is he tough?  His first few years he is going to be banged pretty hard.  Does he have the fight and toughness to get through it and get better.   He did not play at a high school basketball factory that a lot of other top recruits did and he seems more easy going, quiet than some of the other prospects.  So I wonder if he has that dog in him.    I think he will need it.   

I do think the general consensus of internet fans has been too rough on him.    Most fan bases will not be happy if they picked him in the top 10.    The story could be different in a few eyars.

[dirkfansince1998]

I haven't delved into Ament much yet. What's the beef with his fit? At a glance, he looks like a good combo of size and ball-handling. Maybe a little lacking in explosiveness, but very few players have everything.

That's the thing. He is a measurements pick. Size and handling but otherwise really raw. Hasn't really translated to winning basketball. Each year we have teams that gamble on the upside of players with his build but it rarely works out (but if it does you have something special). Don't think the Mavs are in the position to make a super risky move like this.

[Winter]

"Give them our #8 and our second-rounder. We get their #10 and #17."

That's not possible. The theory is that if you move down to 10 (from 8), you are likely to still have the same PG choices. But such a trade w OKC moves you all the way down to 12, not to 10.

That difference is HUGE. At 12, there's a greater-than-zero (more likely than not) that your PGs are all taken, and you don't get the pick of the bigger players either. If you don't like what's at 8, you REALLY won't like what's at 12.

I don't care if all the PGs are taken when we pick. That doesn't matter to me personally. I just want the best players to combine with our star. If we have to look for a PG in a trade, that's fine with me. I'll at least know what Im getting in that case.

[dirkfansince1998]

"Give them our #8 and our second-rounder. We get their #10 and #17."

That's not possible. The theory is that if you move down to 10 (from 8), you are likely to still have the same PG choices. But such a trade w OKC moves you all the way down to 12, not to 10.

That difference is HUGE. At 12, there's a greater-than-zero (more likely than not) that your PGs are all taken, and you don't get the pick of the bigger players either. If you don't like what's at 8, you REALLY won't like what's at 12.

Most likely means that you aren't picking a guard but could still be worth it. If the Mavs leave the draft with two out of Graves, Johnson Jr, Lendeborg and Swain I would happily take that over just having one of the guards (maybe not Wagler, have him slightly above the rest).

[mvossman]

I really think the players discussed at this slot are all pretty good and may be sucessful even as starters, but they don't strike me as star quality at all. It almost seems like the Mavs could get their player at #8.... and it just wouldn't be all that much. Burries might just be another Max Christie. Brown and Flemings might just be C+. One of the biggest problems with the PGs potentially available is that there doesn't seem like much space between them. Even Philon might be lumped into that group.

Maybe the Mavs really like Aday Mara or Moritz and also think Philon is at least as good as the other PGs. Can you get both? That's the kind of thing I'd like to see. Maybe not exactly that, but something like that.

If the Mavs don't get top 4, the odds of getting a star are very low.  At that point the goal should be to get a core piece.  That means a quality starting level PG or an elite role player.  Anything less than that can be had with a quality MLE signing.  The question is do they have a better chance of getting that at 8 versus two shots at 12 and 17.  I lean towards 8.  I think there is a drop off after 8-9 range.

Don't think Burries will be another Max Christie.  He is a better defender, playmaker and rebounder.  I don't know if he will shoot as well as Christie has in the NBA, but he is a better player at everything else.

[mvossman]

Most likely means that you aren't picking a guard but could still be worth it. If the Mavs leave the draft with two out of Graves, Johnson Jr, Lendeborg and Swain I would happily take that over just having one of the guards (maybe not Wagler, have him slightly above the rest).

That would be an interesting draft haul for a team desperate for playmaking and shooting and already heavy at the forward position.  You would almost have to trade away PJ or Naji if not both.  Would make more sense if they truly were in full tear down mode.

[KillerLeft]

I'm also not up on the latest in "declare or not." Has anyone projected to land in the top 10 said they're returning to college? Anyone potentially in the top 20?

[mvossman]

That's the thing. He is a measurements pick. Size and handling but otherwise really raw. Hasn't really translated to winning basketball. Each year we have teams that gamble on the upside of players with his build but it rarely works out (but if it does you have something special). Don't think the Mavs are in the position to make a super risky move like this.

Agreed.  And the Mavs recent history of drafting measurements guys (Green, DSJ) has not gone well.

[KillerLeft]

Agreed.  And the Mavs recent history of drafting measurements guys (Green, DSJ) has not gone well.

Beaubois. O-Max. Two other big swings of the "measurement bat" that popped into my head.