06-19-2026, 07:41 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-19-2026, 08:01 PM by Scott41theMavs.)
(06-19-2026, 06:11 PM)Winter Wrote: From Brett Siegel at ClutchPoints:
"The Mavericks (No. 9) aren’t particularly high on Kingston Flemings and have him ranked lower on their boards than several of his backcourt peers, including Brayden Burries, sources tell ClutchPoints. Speaking of Burries, Siegel hears the Hawks (No. 8) wouldn’t be a “preferred landing spot” for the freshman guard out of Arizona."
Hope to goodness this is smokescreening. Flemings, to me, has a two-way floor, as a lead guard, quite a bit higher than the other four of the 5-9 Five. Ranking him fifth among them, to me, shows a lack of concern for floor that brings back significant worry that they would take Ament at 9.
To me, I would rank them for floor (overall) as such:
Flemings
Burries
Acuff
Wagler
Brown
For ceiling, I would rank them
Acuff
Brown
Wagler (the ideal scenario in which his lack of speed and athleticism are rendered completely immaterial because his BBIQ turns out to be at Luka levels)
Flemings
Burries (but I would still rate Burries as having a very, very high ceiling if he can be a full-time lead guard, just lower than the other four)
Overall, I personally would rank them
Acuff (with the caveat that if you draft him you have consigned yourself to making sure every other player on roster is an elite defender, a la building around Dirk, Luka, Trae, or even Brunson)
Flemings
Burries
Brown
Wagler
To me, there is a far more precipitous gulf between Wagler and whoever is the 10th best prospect in this draft than there is between the top three and Wilson, or between Wilson and Acuff. While I think Wagler has a ton of question marks, the experience of Luka, Brunson, and (from afar) Haliburton and his resemblance to them on many levels, not to mention Masai and Schmitz's adoration of BBIQ, indicates that he would be a solid pick at 9. In short, you're going to get a very good prospect at 9 as long as you don't get cute and eff it up. KL has even convinced me that Johnson would not be a good reach at 9. If you want a guy who isn't one of the pretty-well objective top 9, then trade your ass down.