2026 NBA draft thread

[mvossman]

The space between these two players is not that much in my opinion. Carr is only nine months older than Burries and has another college year of experience. So that age gap is meaningless to me. 

And what I actually said in my post that is that I'm willing to trust the FO with a decision between the two, not that I preferred Carr.

I think the space between the two is more than you do, particularly on the defensive side of the ball.  Too often I have seen toolsy guys get projected to be good defenders when they were not in college, and it rarely happens.  Defense is more than just tools.  Acuff has the tools to be an average defender at least, but I don't see anybody projected him to be one.

I'm not sure why a year+ of additional college experience is meaningless?  Will Burries be the same player next year?

I don't think Carr is in the same tier as Burries.  He is a 3&D project without the D right now.

[hakeemfaan]

I guess I'm not sure why a college junior has more upside than the freshman?  Because of his combine measurements?  It's not like Burries numbers were terrible.  Burries has a more well rounded offensive game (better playmaker, better handle, better processing) and was a much better defender.  As a freshman he was the best player on a final 4 team.  Carr was the best player on a team that wildly underperformed.

I get that the new FO has a preference for an athletic profile that Carr fits to a tee.  I really hope that does not override talent when making decisions on a top 10 pick.  Masai had his biggest successes in the late first round (or later).  I hope that's where they go fishing this time around.

Both these guys are older. Burries despite being a freshman is a year older than Ament. Carr is a year older than Burries.

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

Mavs-Nets deadline trade in 2023...

Dinwiddie + DFS + 2029 1st + 2027 2nd+ 2029 2nd for Kyrie and Morris

Multiple firsts or a high lottery pick isn't going to happen unless Kyrie somehow increased his value compared to 2023.

Of course his value increased, or, rather, it's not bottomed out like it was. How can you not remember that Kyrie was a PR nightmare at the time in Brooklyn?  They, essentially, had to deal him as a distressed asset.  Since then he's become a completely changed person, putting the team first in a way that he never did before.

[Winter]

I think the space between the two is more than you do, particularly on the defensive side of the ball.  Too often I have seen toolsy guys get projected to be good defenders when they were not in college, and it rarely happens.  Defense is more than just tools.  Acuff has the tools to be an average defender at least, but I don't see anybody projected him to be one.

I'm not sure why a year+ of additional college experience is meaningless?  Will Burries be the same player next year?

I don't think Carr is in the same tier as Burries.  He is a 3&D project without the D right now.

Fine. Think whatever you want. It sounds like you just want to argue.

I just said I'll be happy with Burries or Carr.

[hakeemfaan]

I am not sure where the he defends well stuff is coming from. He has the athletic tools and highlight plays but overall he hasn't been a good defender in college. Biggest strength being help defense around the rim. Biggest weakness pick and roll defense and onball defense against smaller guards.

I was just about to post the same. Knock on Carr has been his defense. The comps with LaVine seem apt at this point. Insane athleticism and will get you points but in an important game you will feel more confident with Burries there than him. Now and 5 years from now.


I am not even the biggest Burries fan and I still feel 9 is too high for Carr.

[mvossman]

Just saw that Carr finishes at the rim at an 80% clip on decent volume, which is ridiculous. He shoots and defends well. He measured well. Sign me up. I’m convinced he’s the right pick at 9, though I’m starting to doubt he’ll be there.

I don't think there is any chance Carr is picked top 8.  Its possible he wont be picked in the lottery.  Lot of competition in that tier.

[Winter]

I am not even the biggest Burries fan and I still feel 9 is too high for Carr.

It might be, but it's also possible Burries might be gone when we pick.

That possibility may assume another PG falls to us. I'm not a big fan of any of the PGs, but I know others are. That's fine.

[dirkfansince1998]

Of course his value increased, or, rather, it's not bottomed out like it was. How can you not remember that Kyrie was a PR nightmare at the time in Brooklyn?  They, essentially, had to deal him as a distressed asset.  Since then he's become a completely changed person, putting the team first in a way that he never did before. 

I'm so glad you're not the one negotiating trades.

I remember the Brooklyn story. I also remember his injury history. A 34 year old guard returning from an ACL tear.
And I am glad that I am not going to be as disappointed as others. KP, AD...it's hard to find a big trade where this board didn't overrate the value of Mavs player x/y/z.

[RoyTarpleysGhost]

It makes no sense for a contending team to trade for Kyrie right now, before seeing what he looks like returning from an ACL tear.

It makes very little sense for the Mavs to trade Kyrie right now, with his trade value being at it's lowest and with his skillset being exactly what the team needs to improve.  

I guess everyone is just hyped for the draft and acquiring some theoretical draft pick for Kyrie so they can draft their pet cat.

[Scott41theMavs]

I remember the Brooklyn story. I also remember his injury history. A 34 year old guard returning from an ACL tear.
And I am glad that I am not going to be as disappointed as others. KP, AD...it's hard to find a big trade where this board didn't overrate the value of Mavs player x/y/z.

Re: trading Kyrie: I don't know that anyone here wants to "get rid of him." He's become a great citizen and locker room presence, and if he's even 80% of what he was pre-injury, he'll be a great catalyst for Cooper and perhaps our draft pick(s) to play better and grow. It's about opportunity. I don't think even FGump would turn down the offer presented above, if, as Rasheed suggested, we get our '27 pick back too. Three 1st rounders + cap relief? Duh. But no way that's offered or entertained.

Barring some other team being abjectly stupid like that (and it is Charlotte, after all), I think the best thing is 1) to have him on team through the first part of the season so that he can a) recruit free agents (who you probably won't be able to get if you don't have him) and b) get the team started on a winning path, then 2) see what you can get for him at the TDL. If it's not worth his value to us, then no.

The phenomenon you named - overestimating the trade value of our players - has to do with their value to us. If trading player x makes us better, then trade them. If not, then keep them. The question isn't really "Should we trade player x binarily speaking (unless, of course, his name is AD, lol)," but rather "Should we trade player x if abc is the return."

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

I remember the Brooklyn story. I also remember his injury history. A 34 year old guard returning from an ACL tear.
And I am glad that I am not going to be as disappointed as others. KP, AD...it's hard to find a big trade where this board didn't overrate the value of Mavs player x/y/z.

It's easy to look back and think that's a low ball offer. But at the time DFS was considered a premier 3-D player on a great contract who fetched a 1st. 

So Kyrie, in an absolute fire sale, where most of the NBA wanted nothing to do with him, got a starting PG and two 1sts (including an unprotected). And, yet, you don't see how the Mavs, with much better leverage, couldn't get two firsts? C'mon, man.

Piggybacking off the Hornets idea:

Mavs receive #14, #18 and their 2027 1st, plus Divincenzo, Beringer, Mann, Williams and Smith 

Wolves get Kyrie, Gafford and #30

Hornets receive Gobert and #28

[Winter]

Draft prep podcast from a few hours ago with Sam Vicenie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdL6Be4EPSQ

This is an hour long, but there is an interesting discussion on:

Yaxel
Moritz Johnson
The volume of small PGs in this draft and what that means now. Are they over-valued?
What's the best second-round pick?

[mvossman]

It's easy to look back and think that's a low ball offer. But at the time DFS was considered a premier 3-D player on a great contract who fetched a 1st. 

So Kyrie, in an absolute fire sale, where most of the NBA wanted nothing to do with him, got a starting PG and two 1sts (including an unprotected). And, yet, you don't see how the Mavs, with much better leverage, couldn't get two firsts? C'mon, man.

Piggybacking off the Hornets idea:

Mavs receive #14, #18 and their 2027 1st, plus Divincenzo, Beringer, Mann, Williams and Smith 

Wolves get Kyrie, Gafford and #30

Hornets receive Gobert and #28

I think your argument will be much stronger after teams can see him on the court.  I think right now given his age, how long its been since he has been on the court and how punishing the current CBA is, teams are going to want to see him play before they give up multiple firsts.  Unfortunately that will be after this draft plays out.

[hakeemfaan]

It might be, but it's also possible Burries might be gone when we pick.

That possibility may assume another PG falls to us. I'm not a big fan of any of the PGs, but I know others are. That's fine.

I am one of the few here who likes Philon more than Burries.  I also like Mara a lot. 

So it's not that I'm sold on all the guards who are in the general consensus top 10 draft boards, but as of now there is no way that Carr should leap frog any of them.

[dirkfansince1998]

Re: trading Kyrie: I don't know that anyone here wants to "get rid of him." He's become a great citizen and locker room presence, and if he's even 80% of what he was pre-injury, he'll be a great catalyst for Cooper and perhaps our draft pick(s) to play better and grow. It's about opportunity. I don't think even FGump would turn down the offer presented above, if, as Rasheed suggested, we get our '27 pick back too. Three 1st rounders + cap relief? Duh. But no way that's offered or entertained.

Barring some other team being abjectly stupid like that (and it is Charlotte, after all), I think the best thing is 1) to have him on team through the first part of the season so that he can a) recruit free agents (who you probably won't be able to get if you don't have him) and b) get the team started on a winning path, then 2) see what you can get for him at the TDL. If it's not worth his value to us, then no.

The phenomenon you named - overestimating the trade value of our players - has to do with their value to us. If trading player x makes us better, then trade them. If not, then keep them. The question isn't really "Should we trade player x binarily speaking (unless, of course, his name is AD, lol)," but rather "Should we trade player x if abc is the return."

I did not start the trade Kyrie discussion and I agree that the Mavs shouldn't get rid of him at all costs but I think it is in the best interest of the team to maximize whatever assets they have to build around Flagg and Kyrie simply is too old for that. What is more valuable? Kyrie in the locker room or on the floor for two more years even though he potentially isn't the player he used to be or the return in a trade. I guess we all have our own answer for that question depending on the potential return.

As far as trade proposals go I don't disagree with you at all. What I am missing is the same kind of thought process when we look at potential trade partners. We are super excited about this years draft class and desperately try to come up with trades to add picks but other teams seemingly don't value this years picks as much and would gift them away? Makes no sense.
Only explanation is a) thinking that a player like Kyrie is worth a lot (more than in the past) or b) picks this year aren't as valuable. Cannot be both.

[Chicagojk]

The new leadership will need to have the right to build the team to their vision.   It could be a slow process or one that moves faster.   My thought process at the moment is it will be a little of both.   Maybe quick for some of the older/expiring players, longer for the guys with the longer contracts.  For instance, I could see them move faster on Klay Thompson or Marshall who will be a free agent after the season.  I don't expect them to move Kyrie unless it comes from the player.   I think PJ's and Gafford's value are both less than ideal.    In the ideal world with improved health, better guard play and better team results all of Gafford, PJ and Kyrie play well next year and it gets to a stage we would hate to lose any, but a deal materializes where we cannot say no.    Depending on who they draft, I do expect Kyrie, Gafford and PJ to all be on the roster to begin the year.

[dirkfansince1998]

It's easy to look back and think that's a low ball offer. But at the time DFS was considered a premier 3-D player on a great contract who fetched a 1st. 

So Kyrie, in an absolute fire sale, where most of the NBA wanted nothing to do with him, got a starting PG and two 1sts (including an unprotected). And, yet, you don't see how the Mavs, with much better leverage, couldn't get two firsts? C'mon, man.

Piggybacking off the Hornets idea:

Mavs receive #14, #18 and their 2027 1st, plus Divincenzo, Beringer, Mann, Williams and Smith 

Wolves get Kyrie, Gafford and #30

Hornets receive Gobert and #28

I am not going to stop you because it seemingly makes you happy but I cannot promise you that I won't make some gleeful I told you so posts if/when Kyrie gets traded. You are obviously free to do the same.

[Chicagojk]

I am one of the few here who likes Philon more than Burries.  I also like Mara a lot. 

So it's not that I'm sold on all the guards who are in the general consensus top 10 draft boards, but as of now there is no way that Carr should leap frog any of them.

I don't see it for Mara with the Mavs.  Philon is one I struggle with.  He scored 34 points in his last game against eventual champion Michigan.   He just is a hard evaluation for me.  Probably easier in his role as a freshman.   He was really productive, good height, I love his change of pace.   But he is slim and not a great leaper and I just have trouble getting pumped up after this awful season if he was the prize.   Maybe that is the wrong way to think about it.   I am not sure if I am ever going to reach a landing spot on him prior to the draft.    

I don't get the Carr hype.  I think he is a 20's selection.   But heck, what do I know.

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

Whether it's via Kyrie, future picks or through taking on bad money, considering Masai's and Schmitz' MO, I'll be SHOCKED if the Mavs don't acquire a third 1st in this draft.

I'll put it at 90%.

[Winter]

I am one of the few here who likes Philon more than Burries.  I also like Mara a lot. 

So it's not that I'm sold on all the guards who are in the general consensus top 10 draft boards, but as of now there is no way that Carr should leap frog any of them.

Technically, you may be entirely right. Here's my thinking in a general way.

I think it's in Flagg's best interest (and the team's), to have a veteran PG that can be acquired in a trade. I'm just not in love with any of the current PGs in that second tier, and a rookie PG next year just doesn't excite me. On the other hand, I think a good rookie SG or combo guard along with a good veteran PG makes more sense and I think makes for a stronger frontcourt. It would immediately help with spacing, and allow us to move Klay.

In a nutshell, I think I'm just happier with the thought of a SG on this team as a draft pick. I suspect it's Burries, but I would be happy to trade down a spot or two for Carr and another first-round pick (even if that pick was in another year).