2026 NBA draft thread

[F Gump]

All the discussions about the 5 G's in the 5-10 range have been all over the lot. One day this one is great (or way too flawed), another day that one is great (or way too flawed). I think all of that is a reasonably accurate reflection of four truths:
1 each of those guys have some minuses to criticize and fret over,
2 each of those guys have some pluses to praise and gush over,
3 there's not that much difference in the overall value of any of those 5,
4 there are mock drafts - so, somewhat-possible scenarios - in which each of those 5 is the last man standing among them.

I have some that I like a bit better than the others, but various of the NBA's draft gurus may not have them in the same order.

My bottom line that I've arrived at is: (a) The Mavs have the 9th pick and may simply get G #5 of that group. (b) He may end up being the best of the lot, or the worst, but he should be incredibly much the same value as all the others. © So whoever is there, that's good by me. And they don't control it anyhow. (d) The various non-G players are on a lower tier, and picking one of them would be overthinking a pick that should be easy to make -- you take one of Wagler, Brown, Acuff, Flemings, or Burries. One or more will be there, he will be just fine, and he will be generally as desirable as each of the other 4. Don't need to make it all that difficult.

[hakeemfaan]

All the discussions about the 5 G's in the 5-10 range have been all over the lot. One day this one is great (or way too flawed), another day that one is great (or way too flawed). I think all of that is a reasonably accurate reflection of four truths:
1 each of those guys have some minuses to criticize and fret over,
2 each of those guys have some pluses to praise and gush over,
3 there's not that much difference in the overall value of any of those 5,
4 there are mock drafts - so, somewhat-possible scenarios - in which each of those 5 is the last man standing among them.

I have some that I like a bit better than the others, but various of the NBA's draft gurus may not have them in the same order. 

My bottom line that I've arrived at is: (a) The Mavs have the 9th pick and may simply get G #5 of that group. (b) He may end up being the best of the lot, or the worst, but he should be incredibly much the same value as all the others. © So whoever is there, that's good by me. And they don't control it anyhow. (d) The various non-G players are on a lower tier, and picking one of them would be overthinking a pick that should be easy to make -- you take one of Wagler, Brown, Acuff, Flemings, or Burries. One or more will be there, he will be just fine, and he will be generally as desirable as each of the other 4. Don't need to make it all that difficult.
differ

Who am I to argue with Masai and Schmitz if they make the decision that value at 12 and 17 will be better than who is left at 9? Both are established talent evaluators. However, it will be an extremely ballsy move on their part given that there are certain tiers in this draft based on known floors as of now and knowing the Mavs won't have many great picks for the rest of the decade.  

We all better hope that they hit on whatever decision they make with this draft, because if they get it wrong, we can firmly pencil in that moment as the start of what made Coop ask for a trade a few years down the road.

[mvossman]

All the discussions about the 5 G's in the 5-10 range have been all over the lot. One day this one is great (or way too flawed), another day that one is great (or way too flawed). I think all of that is a reasonably accurate reflection of four truths:
1 each of those guys have some minuses to criticize and fret over,
2 each of those guys have some pluses to praise and gush over,
3 there's not that much difference in the overall value of any of those 5,
4 there are mock drafts - so, somewhat-possible scenarios - in which each of those 5 is the last man standing among them.

I have some that I like a bit better than the others, but various of the NBA's draft gurus may not have them in the same order. 

My bottom line that I've arrived at is: (a) The Mavs have the 9th pick and may simply get G #5 of that group. (b) He may end up being the best of the lot, or the worst, but he should be incredibly much the same value as all the others. © So whoever is there, that's good by me. And they don't control it anyhow. (d) The various non-G players are on a lower tier, and picking one of them would be overthinking a pick that should be easy to make -- you take one of Wagler, Brown, Acuff, Flemings, or Burries. One or more will be there, he will be just fine, and he will be generally as desirable as each of the other 4. Don't need to make it all that difficult.

I hope this is how it plays out.  Later in the draft is the time to get cute.

[F Gump]

We all better hope that they hit on whatever decision they make with this draft, because if they get it wrong, we can firmly pencil in that moment as the start of what made Coop ask for a trade a few years down the road.

Nope. Not buying into that imagined-disaster scenario even one smidgen. The Mavs keeping Flagg depends way more on their willingness to pay him, than anything else.

Would landing a good player help? Sure. But it's not now or never on adding talent. They will have the same 200M or so to build out a good team as anyone else. So they can offer money, and minutes. And they already have the superstar.

[hakeemfaan]

Nope. Not buying into that imagined-disaster scenario even one smidgen. The Mavs keeping Flagg depends way more on their willingness to pay him, than anything else.

Would landing a good player help? Sure. But it's not now or never on adding talent. They will have the same 200M or so to build out a good team as anyone else. So they can offer money, and minutes. And they already have the superstar.

The Mavs dont' have any great picks for the most part the rest of the decade. They got jack squat out of losing two generational players.  Even the AD trade to Atl, IMO, was a bad one.

I would love it if Coop was like Luka and Dirk and never ask for a trade, but the West is getting tougher and Coop sees how someone like Harper is now suddenly getting a lot of love.   The Mavs have to get it right with this pick.

[Scott41theMavs]

I think most of us would agree that 1) there is a group of nine players who are more likely to succeed in the L than all of the other players. 2) In spite of that, there will be a handful of players below that who will end up being just as good who would end up lumped in interspersed with those top 9 in a redraft. It’s just that there’s no consensus on who those guys are, and that it would take a very wise and astute basketball man to identify who those guys are now based on something other than really fortunate guesswork.

Guess who two of the, say, top five guys in the league right now at correctly picking who the diamonds in the rough are. That’s right. While I am firmly in the Don’t Get Cute camp, I could see a very persuasive trade down for two top 20 picks argument on that solitary basis.

I would be far more comfortable- *extremely* comfortable, based on the argument I just made - with them staying put at 9 to choose between their favorites (if there’s more than one) left there, *and* using #30 + another one of our trade assets to obtain another top 25 (preferably top 20) pick. Best of both worlds.

[Scott41theMavs]

The Mavs dont' have any great picks for the most part the rest of the decade. They got jack squat out of losing two generational players.  Even the AD trade to Atl, IMO, was a bad one.

I would love it if Coop was like Luka and Dirk and never ask for a trade, but the West is getting tougher and Coop sees how someone like Harper is now suddenly getting a lot of love.   The Mavs have to get it right with this pick.

In terms of disposition, Cooper strikes me as being very Dirk like. If he makes strong relationships here, I could definitely see him being another of those loyal to a fault guys.

Re: Gump’s non-draft team building argument - if the Mavs are in any way going to be successful at that, then as you have also argued, it will be very important for them to have some success this year - both for attracting free agents and for building up our trade assets. No tanking, and 45-47 wins should be a realistic goal for them if the FO does a decent job this offseason.

[dirkfansince1998]

I think most of us would agree that 1) there is a group of nine players who are more likely to succeed in the L than all of the other players. 2) In spite of that, there will be a handful of players below that who will end up being just as good who would end up lumped in interspersed with those top 9 in a redraft. It’s just that there’s no consensus on who those guys are, and that it would take a very wise and astute basketball man to identify who those guys are now based on something other than really fortunate guesswork.

Guess who two of the, say, top five guys in the league right now at correctly picking who the diamonds in the rough are. That’s right. While I am firmly in the Don’t Get Cute camp, I could see a very persuasive trade down for two top 20 picks argument on that solitary basis.

I would be far more comfortable- *extremely* comfortable, based on the argument I just made - with them staying put at 9 to choose between their favorites (if there’s more than one) left there, *and* using #30 + another one of our trade assets to obtain another top 25 (preferably top 20) pick. Best of both worlds.

Don't think the consensus is all that important for decision makers in the league. That's why I don't really buy into the five guards in the same tier narrative. Wouldn't be suprised if the Mavs (or any other team) are completly out on one of the guards. Potentially have multiple guys from the consensus 10-20 range above them.
Obviously I have my own favorites but I won't lose my mind if the Mavs don't pick one of the guards or trade down.

[mvossman]

We all better hope that they hit on whatever decision they make with this draft, because if they get it wrong, we can firmly pencil in that moment as the start of what made Coop ask for a trade a few years down the road.

Its way too early to be talking like this.  We have an FO with a history of building teams via late first round picks and trades.

[Scott41theMavs]

Don't think the consensus is all that important for decision makers in the league. That's why I don't really buy into the five guards in the same tier narrative. Wouldn't be suprised if the Mavs (or any other team) are completly out on one of the guards. Potentially have multiple guys from the consensus 10-20 range above them.
Obviously I have my own favorites but I won't lose my mind if the Mavs don't pick one of the guards or trade down.

Okay. Agree to disagree. As I said, I think there’s a pretty huge floor/upside composite gap between the top nine (Big 4 + the 5-9 Five) and everyone else. If it turns out they’re sour on whoever is left (and in spite of my tremendous respect for Masai and Schmitz, I still think they’re dead wrong if Flemings is that guy), then I’m okay with them trading down, but not with them reaching. Since we don’t control our pick for the next 4 years, this draft is way too important for that. I would compare my stance to that of ownership who wouldn’t let Nellie draft Dirk at 6 - he had to get Dirk + something else. Nellie was right about Dirk. Perot and co., incompetent as they were, were correct that he needed to get something else as well given the risk and importance of that draft.

[dirkfansince1998]

Okay. Agree to disagree. As I said, I think there’s a pretty huge floor/upside composite gap between the top nine (Big 4 + the 5-9 Five) and everyone else. If it turns out they’re sour on whoever is left (and in spite of my tremendous respect for Masai and Schmitz, I still think they’re dead wrong if Flemings is that guy), then I’m okay with them trading down, but not with them reaching. Since we don’t control our pick for the next 4 years, this draft is way too important for that. I would compare my stance to that of ownership who wouldn’t let Nellie draft Dirk at 6 - he had to get Dirk + something else. Nellie was right about Dirk. Perot and co., incompetent as they were, were correct that he needed to get something else as well given the risk and importance of that draft.

I could bring up the DSJ disaster to make a case against the consensus pick but I don't think looking back at past drafts in hindsight helps either case. In the end it's about talent evaluation and in some cases the consensus option was the right choice. In others it didn't workout. Based on the odds at least one of the five guards is going to bust. But that's another narrative that shouldn't impact decision making.
They absolutely have to get it rid but I would argue that just picking whoever drops to #9 is the safe option. Not necessarily the best option. No one could blame them if things don't workout because it was the consensus pick. Thankfully Schmitz's and Ujiri's track record suggests that they aren't scared to make unpopular decisions in the draft.

[F Gump]

In terms of disposition, Cooper strikes me as being very Dirk like. If he makes strong relationships here, I could definitely see him being another of those loyal to a fault guys.

Re: Gump’s non-draft team building argument - if the Mavs are in any way going to be successful at that, then as you have also argued, it will be very important for them to have some success this year - both for attracting free agents and for building up our trade assets. No tanking, and 45-47 wins should be a realistic goal for them if the FO does a decent job this offseason.

This ^.

But I don't think it takes a one-in-a-million like Dirk. Top players are generally not that fickle. The instances where a top star player forced a trade because of "frustration over lack of winning" are not common at all, and tend to happen when he is already on his 3rd contract (year 10 in the league). The NBA has also added rules that give financial incentives to top players who remain on their original team, so I can't recall the last time a superstar forced his way out (except for way later in his career). 

We also tend to WAYYYYYYYY underestimate the value towards winning - and the drive to make it happen - that come with the superstar. The team with a superstar is a long ways towards being very good because they have that superstar, and because the superstar will do what it takes to will his team to wins. The Mavs already have that guy.

Where top players get away comes way more easily if a team won't pay them the max money they want, and the Mavs have made an art form of losing players because they just don't want to pay. NOT about too few wins, but about too few dollars.

CF is likely to run away if the Mavs get cheap. Otherwise, he'll be here for another decade. Or two.

As far as winning, yes we want the best player possible, but fortunately THIS pick isn't make or break. It's only one opportunity to try to get better. There will be MANY ensuing decisions besides that one that can also add talent. More picks offers help, but it's not what defines the ability to build a better team. If you lacks picks, you just have to find other ways to get better.

[hakeemfaan]

Its way too early to be talking like this.  We have an FO with a history of building teams via late first round picks and trades.

Same FO man was also let go after a few years when his magic ran out.  You can't bank forever on hitting low round picks. 

Don't get me wrong. I absolutely love the fact that Mavs got one of the better front office men in Masai, and also loved him getting Schmitz, but they need to get this pick right, because, due to no fault of theirs, the previous regimes have not given them much room for error.

I agree with your sentiment that they shouldn't get cute.  I also agree with dirkfan's comment that maybe they've not evaluated the floors or tiers the same way that most fans have and might feel that moving down is the better option if at 9 they don't find the players they really covet.

That's why I said, I am not smarter than them, but they need to get this right, whatever they decide to do..stay pat or trade down.

[Scott41theMavs]

I could bring up the DSJ disaster to make a case against the consensus pick but I don't think looking back at past drafts in hindsight helps either case. In the end it's about talent evaluation and in some cases the consensus option was the right choice. In others it didn't workout. Based on the odds at least one of the five guards is going to bust. But that's another narrative that shouldn't impact decision making.
They absolutely have to get it rid but I would argue that just picking whoever drops to #9 is the safe option. Not necessarily the best option. No one could blame them if things don't workout because it was the consensus pick. Thankfully Schmitz's and Ujiri's track record suggests that they aren't scared to make unpopular decisions in the draft.

Re: DSJ: We had good enough scouting at that time that there’s no excuse in retrospect that we didn’t draft Mitchell - by trade down, sure, if that would have been the most prudent way to do it. But of course if we did that we’d have never gotten Luka.

[KillerLeft]

The other thing is Flemmings can't moonlight as a 2 like Wagler/Brown/Burries can.  He has to make it as a lead guard if he is going to make it.

This. 

IF the Mavs aren't as interested in Flemings as consensus suggests they should be, my guess is that it has quite a bit to do with how serious they are about trying a year of Kyrie with Flagg here. It's not how I'd think at all, but at least it makes a little sense.

[dirkfansince1998]

Re: DSJ: We had good enough scouting at that time that there’s no excuse in retrospect that we didn’t draft Mitchell - by trade down, sure, if that would have been the most prudent way to do it. But of course if we did that we’d have never gotten Luka.

https://www.nba.com/news/2017-consensus-mock-draft

Wasn't the narrative in 2017. DSJ narrative was comparable to Brown this year. Consensus top 10 pick that might drop because of injury concerns (ACL tear in highschool, resulting in knee issues in college). Mitchell wasn't in the same tier. Mock drafts had him in the 11-14 range.

[hakeemfaan]

When I watched DSJ that first year before Luka, two things stood out: a) His inconsistent jump shot and b) His stamina was surprisingly poor for someone who appeared quite chiseled. On point (b) I've had my issues with Luka, but one thing I'll defend him on always is that even the fat version of Luka got stronger as the game went on even when multiple super fit defensive specialists who were trying their best to stop him would wear down. Some people naturally have great stamina. I would have noticed DSJ's flaws immediately if I were a scout.

I don't have any NBA pedgree, but from what I've seen over decades, guards who can shoot have a very high chance of sticking around in the league. If you're a poor shooter, the road is much tougher to stick around, and you better have multiple other things in terms of size or athleticism or defense to make a mark.

That's why I came around on both Flemings and Burries despite not being that thrilled with them at the start. That's why I soured on Ament after being high on him previously. That's why Brown also scares me because he could be another MCW.

[F Gump]

I could bring up the DSJ disaster to make a case against the consensus pick but I don't think looking back at past drafts in hindsight helps either case. 

I keep hearing the DSJ pick being used as a comp situation, to sell that terrible draftsmanship is likely again, and I don't buy it. 

I do recall in that DSJ draft year there seemed to be a top 6 (out of our range) and then the 2nd tier with DSJ, Ntilikina, Markannen, and Monk being regularly in that spot. We talked about it a lot. But I don't recall we the public having realms of info (lots of gurus, videos, analysis, articles, etc) on the various players, like we do now.

DSJ turned out to be meh. But that certainly wasn't on us (we were only bystanders with opinions). And there's no question that Cuban did not prioritize the draft, with either money, personnel, or approach, so the result was kinda what you get when you are winging it. 

The point being - I think we are in a completely different world with this draft, on about every level. Our fan expertise is way better, just because we see both videos and discussions of all these players from about every angle. And after many years of having a 2nd class draft operation (that in some years was a total laughingstock), the Mavs have hired people who are experts at this.

[Scott41theMavs]

https://www.nba.com/news/2017-consensus-mock-draft

Wasn't the narrative in 2017. DSJ narrative was comparable to Brown this year. Consensus top 10 pick that might drop because of injury concerns (ACL tear in highschool, resulting in knee issues in college). Mitchell wasn't in the same tier. Mock drafts had him in the 11-14 range.

I was trying to communicate these very things in what I posted and evidently didn't do it very well. I understand that DSJ was universally mocked ahead of Mitchell, and even the majority here would have griped had they drafted Mitchell over DSJ at 9 (to be fair, there were about three or four guys here who were raving about Mitchell and were hoping we would draft him). My point was, the Mavs' scouting should have been good enough to make the right choice in the face of PR pressure, and if trading down a spot or two was useful or necessary to the PR, then they should have done that.

BTW, the DSJ comp is why I was out on Brown until around a month or so ago. I am still concerned about injury and decision-making, but believe in his upside.

[Chicagojk]

Some Givony videos. Not the same person as Schmitz but they seem to think similarly on prospects

Brown
https://x.com/DraftExpress/status/206837...deo/1?s=46

Acuff
https://x.com/draftexpress/status/206834...54553?s=46

Quiantance
https://x.com/DraftExpress/status/206833...deo/1?s=46

Bigs

https://x.com/DraftExpress/status/206832...deo/1?s=46

Ament

https://x.com/DraftExpress/status/206835...deo/1?s=46

Flemings

https://x.com/DraftExpress/status/206839...deo/1?s=46


Givony has been steadfast that Peterson is the better prospect than AJ. It also sounds like he would have boozer over him too. They are all three close though