2026 NBA draft thread

[HoosierDaddyKid]

Billy Richmond declared.  Probably won’t be on my target list at 30 but is probably a late first/early second if he declares.  His best basketball is ahead of him.  The shooting is the thing that will determine if he is a functional NBa player.

He reminds me of Ron Holland II of Detroit. Has a nose for the ball, very athletic, good defender with a suspect shot.

[mvossman]

"Why exactly do those vets need to be good next season? I think that is what plenty of us are complaining about. It's not one year with a botched tank job. It's the refusal to actually rebuild with a longterm plan. They don't need to be good next season."

I don't agree with this thesis. The Mavs have no upside to stretching out the misery. They won't get any draft benefits (for being a bad team) until 2031, so they need to go ahead and win. That also helps Flagg grow as a player -- the sooner you get him into playoff games, the faster he learns what THAT level of play is all about.

This team has a lot of talent. And a superstar in the works. If they hit in the draft (admittedly much iffier than it has to be, but they should have a good chance this summer at a solid starter or better), and find a good player in free agency with MLE, they could be competitive fairly quickly. It doesn't necessarily take years.

Not that I agree with it, but for the sake of discussion, I would also say that if they were to see things like you and plan to make this a slow arduous process, where they are trading their good players and blowing off a few seasons, they certainly want them to have been showcased in as positive a manner as possible in 2025-26. Gutting their value just before they trade them would not be wise. They certainly need more/better talent, and if they are trading away talent, they need talent in return.

But I'm expecting them in 26-27 to shoot at doing what PHX and POR did this season, neither of whom looked all that impressive in Oct, yet they each cobbled together a few good players and landed a playoff spot out of nowhere. I think if the Mavs can be healthy, they should be at least at that level. Flagg is a difference maker, and he will be even better next season. Put some talent around him, to open the floor and help him carry the load, and they have a good chance imo to take a leap.

PS - About Presti, he tanked because he had OKC picks that he could enhance. Unfortunately the Mavs don't have their own picks. That's the reality, and it would be stupid to tank if you don't have picks.

I'm not against trying to be competitive next season, but trading for Middleton and holding onto Klay while giving both significant minutes made no sense for a tanking team.  I seriously doubt it will be worth whatever value they might get from two 35 year olds at the end of their careers in a non contending season.

[F Gump]

I'm not against trying to be competitive next season, 

"I'm not against trying to be competitive next season" --- Me either. 

At THIS point, all the decisions made for the 2025-26 season were the product of inferior GM's, and irrelevant to the question of how to best build the future. Right? All that matters is where do we go from here.

As for what to do with players like Middleton and Klay for NEXT SEASON, I wouldn't expect them to ADD older guys on their last legs. But imo with players WHO ARE ALREADY HERE (or easily retained), they might add value where there are holes in the roster, and they can provide needed skills no one else has. Last season, that would have been PG/creation/shooting 3s. If you move them, does that help you be more talented*, or less so? 

I also think CF needs talent around him, to make him better. Not a stripped down roster. That's the goal for next season from about every angle, imo.


* "More talented" can be getting picks that are good enough to solve problems, or freeing cap room to sign players good enough to solve problems, or trading one player for another. But unless the player is just awful or too expensive, getting rid of a player without talent/assets coming back is usually NOT helpful to building a better team.

[Winter]

Let's say the Mavs are picking between 8-10. Let's say Wagler, Acuff, Brown, and Flemings are off the board.

Burries is available. Would you rather have Burries and your 30th pick, or two picks between 12 and 25?

[Chicagojk]

Really like Tanner. Same for Braden Smith. But I don't think modern NBA teams should have more than one (max two) tiny guards on the roster. Mavs already have Nembhard (assuming that Williams is gone). Personally I would happily give up on Nembhard if the Mavs can land one of the mentioned guys.

I like Smith as well.  I think he is similar to Nemhbard.  I really hope we keep Nemby as I think he can develop into a good backup point guard on the right roster.  Probably not right now though.   I think Smith is a second round pick.  Although I believe he gets drafted.

As far as the award for the guy who doesn't look like a player, but is sort of good here is Nick Martinelli.  OKC took a second rounder from Northwestern last year who had some moments.  Martinelli is probably better.   Has a chance to go in the second round.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITLuin5o4pI

[mvossman]

"I'm not against trying to be competitive next season" --- Me either. 

At THIS point, all the decisions made for the 2025-26 season were the product of inferior GM's, and irrelevant to the question of how to best build the future. Right? All that matters is where do we go from here.

As for what to do with players like Middleton and Klay for NEXT SEASON, I wouldn't expect them to ADD older guys on their last legs. But imo with players WHO ARE ALREADY HERE (or easily retained), they might add value where there are holes in the roster, and they can provide needed skills no one else has. Last season, that would have been PG/creation/shooting 3s. If you move them, does that help you be more talented*, or less so? 

I also think CF needs talent around him, to make him better. Not a stripped down roster. That's the goal for next season from about every angle, imo.


* "More talented" can be getting picks that are good enough to solve problems, or freeing cap room to sign players good enough to solve problems, or trading one player for another. But unless the player is just awful or too expensive, getting rid of a player without talent/assets coming back is usually NOT helpful to building a better team.

If nothing else it is an argument for not sticking with what they currently have and a reason to be concerned if they end up punting to Riccardi (which I think has a real chance of happening). I agree the stripped down roster ship has sailed.

[DanSchwartzgan]

As for what to do with players like Middleton and Klay for NEXT SEASON, I wouldn't expect them to ADD older guys on their last legs. But imo with players WHO ARE ALREADY HERE (or easily retained), they might add value where there are holes in the roster, and they can provide needed skills no one else has. Last season, that would have been PG/creation/shooting 3s. If you move them, does that help you be more talented*, or less so? 

I also think CF needs talent around him, to make him better. Not a stripped down roster. That's the goal for next season from about every angle, imo.


* "More talented" can be getting picks that are good enough to solve problems, or freeing cap room to sign players good enough to solve problems, or trading one player for another. But unless the player is just awful or too expensive, getting rid of a player without talent/assets coming back is usually NOT helpful to building a better team.

I'm in the "no point in being bad" or "let's try to be good" camp as well.  Just thought I'd suggest that the new GM isn't likely to make sweeping changes this summer.  If there is a no-brainer long term fit available with the MLE or TPE....absolutely.  Otherwise, the sweeping changes probably start at the TDL and the summer of 27.  I can see some setting-the-table type moves this summer.  The trade before THE trade type moves.  Creating more flexibility for 2027 type moves.

I think the "if" question on Middleton is less important than the "how".  Might we get a second and another TPE for a S&T?  Sure.  I think I'd rather have him on a structure where he is valued at the TDL and he and/or Klay could be moved for a real building block (or something that better leads to a real building block).  I'm all for trying to be the 26/27 version of Portland.  But, I wouldn't forego something tangible for the future to create the difference between a 4-2 first round series loss and a 4-1 first round series loss.  Cooper's development is enhanced by being surrounded by better players.  The team's long term plan is enhanced by getting the assets to "solve problems" as you say.

[Scott41theMavs]

Let's say the Mavs are picking between 8-10.  Let's say Wagler, Acuff, Brown, and Flemings are off the board.

Burries is available. Would you rather have Burries and your 30th pick, or two picks between 12 and 25?

Make it two between 12 and 20, and the answer is yes. Swain and Anderson.

[Winter]

Make it two between 12 and 20, and the answer is yes. Swain and Anderson.

My answer is yes, but I would take Graves, and either Evans or Swain.

[michaeltex]

I'm in the "no point in being bad" or "let's try to be good" camp as well.  Just thought I'd suggest that the new GM isn't likely to make sweeping changes this summer.  If there is a no-brainer long term fit available with the MLE or TPE....absolutely.  Otherwise, the sweeping changes probably start at the TDL and the summer of 27.  I can see some setting-the-table type moves this summer.  The trade before THE trade type moves.  Creating more flexibility for 2027 type moves.

I think the "if" question on Middleton is less important than the "how".  Might we get a second and another TPE for a S&T?  Sure.  I think I'd rather have him on a structure where he is valued at the TDL and he and/or Klay could be moved for a real building block (or something that better leads to a real building block).  I'm all for trying to be the 26/27 version of Portland.  But, I wouldn't forego something tangible for the future to create the difference between a 4-2 first round series loss and a 4-1 first round series loss.  Cooper's development is enhanced by being surrounded by better players.  The team's long term plan is enhanced by getting the assets to "solve problems" as you say.

I'm thinking about it in terms of moving the team culture from hanging on/losing/tanking to winning and expecting to win. IMO, DAL has been in the dumps, culture-wise, since the beginning of the 2024 season. It started with Luka out of shape and needing an in-season focused absence to get ready to play. Then the calf issue reared it's head, again, and the team was back in hanging on mode until his return. The THE TRADE happened, shocking the team followed by such a rash of injuries that the season became "what's the point", and a late tank was implemented. 25 started with everyone justifiably holding their breath for the next AD injury, despite the excitement of a shiny new #1 pick, and quickly became a lost season of low expectations (how few games was DAL even a favorite?) and an "ethical" tank into where we are today.

Personally, I want to see some positive growth in player development, including Coop, and a return to winning as a tradition, not an accident. That will require some professional GM-ing and competent coaching. DAL is still in limbo on the former and cautiously confident in the latter. Kidd did get them to the Finals just a few years back, so he's at least earned the chance. The last two years weren't due to coaching.

[dirkfansince1998]

I'm thinking about it in terms of moving the team culture from hanging on/losing/tanking to winning and expecting to win. IMO, DAL has been in the dumps, culture-wise, since the beginning of the 2024 season. It started with Luka out of shape and needing an in-season focused absence to get ready to play. Then the calf issue reared it's head, again, and the team was back in hanging on mode until his return. The THE TRADE happened, shocking the team followed by such a rash of injuries that the season became "what's the point", and a late tank was implemented. 25 started with everyone justifiably holding their breath for the next AD injury, despite the excitement of a shiny new #1 pick, and quickly became a lost season of low expectations (how few games was DAL even a favorite?) and an "ethical" tank into where we are today.

Personally, I want to see some positive growth in player development, including Coop, and a return to winning as a tradition, not an accident. That will require some professional GM-ing and competent coaching. DAL is still in limbo on the former and cautiously confident in the latter. Kidd did get them to the Finals just a few years back, so he's at least earned the chance. The last two years weren't due to coaching.

Interesting. Because for me that's exactly the reason why I want to see a clear cut and rebuild. Who is going to deliver the growth and development part. Only real standout prospects are Flagg and whoever they (hopefully) pick in the draft. 
Mavs have no reason not to try to win as many games as possible but they can do it with Flagg's timeline in mind or just looking at it from year to year.

I want an expert GM that rebuilds the team around Flagg. Starting from scratch. Not with the leftovers of a team that was build around Luka. Mavs are on a different timeline. Have different roster needs.

[mvossman]

Interesting. Because for me that's exactly the reason why I want to see a clear cut and rebuild. Who is going to deliver the growth and development part. Only real standout prospects are Flagg and whoever they (hopefully) pick in the draft. 
Mavs have no reason not to try to win as many games as possible but they can do it with Flagg's timeline in mind or just looking at it from year to year.

I want an expert GM that rebuilds the team around Flagg. Starting from scratch. Not with the leftovers of a team that was build around Luka. Mavs are on a different timeline. Have different roster needs.

I would consider Lively in that group.  I have not given up on him yet.

I am all for getting younger and accumulating assets, but a full tear down is a hard sell when they can't take advantage of one of the main reasons for doing it (accumulating assets via sucking).

[F Gump]

I want an expert GM that rebuilds the team around Flagg. Starting from scratch. 

1  "I want an expert GM that rebuilds the team around Flagg"  -- Yep. 

That's a reminder that an "expert GM" who doesn't realize that you build around your best player, assuming he is all-NBA caliber, isn't really an expert. (See Harrison, N.) A player's value for the Mavs should be based on his contribution to and synergy with CF.

2  "Starting from scratch." -- Nope.

This says the players on the current roster - including the ones CF already knows and (perhaps) has great chemistry with - are immediately disqualified from being used as an answer. No thanks.  Way off base. 

It's also important to recognize there is extra value and practicality in the players already on the roster, from the sheer fact that they are already available to be a Mav. The NBA is NOT a cafeteria-style setup where you can simply select whoever you want. Getting good players can be hard. Whereas, keeping good players, once you have them, is much easier. Even if they aren't ideal.

IOW, the path to building around CF has already started - start with the 2025-26 roster and use them to best advantage. Some might stay for many years, some might be here for a few until you find better talents/fits, and some might need to go now in order to be replaced with something better.

[dirkfansince1998]

1  "I want an expert GM that rebuilds the team around Flagg"  -- Yep. 

That's a reminder that an "expert GM" who doesn't realize that you build around your best player, assuming he is all-NBA caliber, isn't really an expert. (See Harrison, N.) A player's value for the Mavs should be based on his contribution to and synergy with CF.

2  "Starting from scratch." -- Nope.

This says the players on the current roster - including the ones CF already knows and (perhaps) has great chemistry with - are immediately disqualified from being used as an answer. No thanks.  Way off base. 

It's also important to recognize there is extra value and practicality in the players already on the roster, from the sheer fact that they are already available to be a Mav. The NBA is NOT a cafeteria-style setup where you can simply select whoever you want. Getting good players can be hard. Whereas, keeping good players, once you have them, is much easier. Even if they aren't ideal.

IOW, the path to building around CF has already started - start with the 2025-26 roster and use them to best advantage. Some might stay for many years, some might be here for a few until you find better talents/fits, and some might need to go now in order to be replaced with something better.

I think it is the opposite and want to highlight what I already pointed out earlier. What we have and what we lost due to Nico cannot be changed. How we use what we have is what matters. I don't think that any GM would ever follow my logic because they have more pressure to perform and get the Mavs back on track as fast as possible. The question is if as fast as possible back into contention is the best way. Or if a slower and more patient approach is actually more likely to succeed.
And in my opinion asset accumulation is more important than anything else right now. Otherwise the entire process will slowly run into the same problems that we saw in the past when the Mavs rushed rebuilds around Dirk and Luka. Simply lacking the necessary assets to go for a real upgrade. Limiting the potential ceiling of a Flagg lead team.
Right now the Mavs have the opportunity to accumulate the necessary assets. In 3-4 years it will be contender or bust.

[Scott41theMavs]

I think it is the opposite and want to highlight what I already pointed out earlier. What we have and what we lost due to Nico cannot be changed. How we use what we have is what matters. I don't think that any GM would ever follow my logic because they have more pressure to perform and get the Mavs back on track as fast as possible. The question is if as fast as possible back into contention is the best way. Or if a slower and more patient approach is actually more likely to succeed.
And in my opinion asset accumulation is more important than anything else right now. Otherwise the entire process will slowly run into the same problems that we saw in the past when the Mavs rushed rebuilds around Dirk and Luka. Simply lacking the necessary assets to go for a real upgrade. Limiting the potential ceiling of a Flagg lead team.
Right now the Mavs have the opportunity to accumulate the necessary assets. In 3-4 years it will be contender or bust.

In any event, this will have to be an extremely unorthodox rebuild due to not having our picks for the next four years. 

To me, the most important skillset for a GM is genius-level talent scouting. Cf. Nellie. That's even more important for the Mavs when their superstar will only be a second-year player and when we will have first-round picks, but very low ones. All but the absolute worst of drafts have major diamonds after the lottery. Any team-building success we have is going to be predicated on our new guy being top 3 in the league in that ability. 

As for your take of presumably trading off all of our vets, none but Kyrie is likely to get you a very high pick in return. If they accumulate a big stash of post-lottery picks, then having a GM who is asymptotically perfect at finding rotation players in the later first round is going to be even more important.

[F Gump]

1  What we have and what we lost due to Nico cannot be changed. How we use what we have is what matters.

2  I don't think that any GM would ever follow my logic because they have more pressure to perform and get the Mavs back on track as fast as possible. The question is if as fast as possible back into contention is the best way. Or if a slower and more patient approach is actually more likely to succeed.

1 Yep, exactly. We start here.

2 I think it's a mistake to INSIST on continuing to be bad for a while, with the idea that it's good for them to continue to lose. There is NO VALUE AT ALL in being bad and losing games. Strip the team of talent, to ensure they suck? No.

The net effect of winning is that it makes the players look better if you decide to trade someone, and it motivates CF and the other keepers. It also forces the players to compete for minutes. There is only one downside to winning, which is that it messes up draft picks as you tank, but since they don't have picks, then it's not a factor for the Mavs.

If a GM wants to trade all future assets (picks, young players who need to be developed, etc) then yeah, that's not a good plan, but I don't think anyone is envisioning that as a possible choice that an Expert GM would make. But with what they have to work with, and reasonable tweaks, do what you can to win asap, as much as possible.

I also think that the presence of CF accelerates the potential to get much better faster. Add another elite youngster in the draft, which is very possible, and it's time to win now, as fast as CF and the 2nd guy are ready. Don't hold them back!

[michaeltex]

I also think that the presence of CF accelerates the potential to get much better faster. Add another elite youngster in the draft, which is very possible, and it's time to win now, as fast as CF and the 2nd guy are ready. Don't hold them back!

Agree with this statement. We'll probably be disappointed in the end, but so are 29 other teams every year. It's going to take some time to gel and winning will help everyone. Coop and the other youngsters will gain confidence in their level of play while the vets will find themselves committed to something to be proud of in the future.

That said, while I don't think you can tank another year away while Coop's on his rookie deal, the future MBT needs to avoid betting the farm on another KP-like trade just because Coop has so much potential.

[dirkfansince1998]

1 Yep, exactly. We start here.

2 I think it's a mistake to INSIST on continuing to be bad for a while, with the idea that it's good for them to continue to lose. There is NO VALUE AT ALL in being bad and losing games. Strip the team of talent, to ensure they suck? No.

The net effect of winning is that it makes the players look better if you decide to trade someone, and it motivates CF and the other keepers. It also forces the players to compete for minutes. There is only one downside to winning, which is that it messes up draft picks as you tank, but since they don't have picks, then it's not a factor for the Mavs.

If a GM wants to trade all future assets (picks, young players who need to be developed, etc) then yeah, that's not a good plan, but I don't think anyone is envisioning that as a possible choice that an Expert GM would make. But with what they have to work with, and reasonable tweaks, do what you can to win asap, as much as possible.

I also think that the presence of CF accelerates the potential to get much better faster. Add another elite youngster in the draft, which is very possible, and it's time to win now, as fast as CF and the 2nd guy are ready. Don't hold them back!

I am not sure where the ensuring they suck part is coming from. They can play as competitive as possible. Just with a younger roster that might actually feature some players that are still relevant when Flagg reaches true superstar franchise player level.

We don't even have a second guy right now. Need lottery luck + the right pick but somehow you are already thinking of the Mavs as a potential contender. Even if the Mavs nail the draft it's more likely that whoever ends up on the Mavs needs some time to reach the necessary level (for a PG year three is somewhat realistic). Just don't see how the Mavs with the current roster + (best case) healthy Kyrie and this years draft pick are anywhere close to contender status. And that's more or less the best case scenario.
Already fear how this would play out. Draft pick isn't as ready as some people would like. Mavs run out of patience. Make another rushed win now trade to turn a play-in team into a fringe playoff team.

[dirkfansince1998]

Agree with this statement. We'll probably be disappointed in the end, but so are 29 other teams every year. It's going to take some time to gel and winning will help everyone. Coop and the other youngsters will gain confidence in their level of play while the vets will find themselves committed to something to be proud of in the future.

That said, while I don't think you can tank another year away while Coop's on his rookie deal, the future MBT needs to avoid betting the farm on another KP-like trade just because Coop has so much potential.

That's inevitable because the Mavs don't have the assets for mutiple big moves. As of now they don't even have enoug picks for a KP-like trade. No room for error. They need to nail every single move to turn things around within the next two years and even that might not be enough. The whole reason why I am so adamant about asset accumulation. Don't go with the super risky approach again. Accept that it takes more than one year to rebuild.

[F Gump]

I am not sure where the ensuring they suck part is coming from. They can play as competitive as possible. Just with a younger roster that might actually feature some players that are still relevant when Flagg reaches true superstar franchise player level.

We don't even have a second guy right now. Need lottery luck + the right pick but somehow you are already thinking of the Mavs as a potential contender. Even if the Mavs nail the draft it's more likely that whoever ends up on the Mavs needs some time to reach the necessary level (for a PG year three is somewhat realistic). Just don't see how the Mavs with the current roster + (best case) healthy Kyrie and this years draft pick are anywhere close to contender status. And that's more or less the best case scenario.

Already fear how this would play out. Draft pick isn't as ready as some people would like. Mavs run out of patience. Make another rushed win now trade to turn a play-in team into a fringe playoff team.

"somehow you are already thinking of the Mavs as a potential contender." --- You are creating a strawman. No one is saying they will be an instant contender. Everyone is saying they have the potential to win games and start to be a factor in the league, using the talent they already have, plus what they can acquire. So they need to try to win. Let it go where it goes.

And trying to win scares you. ~shrug~ It doesn't scare me. I welcome it. Winning needs to be the goal. Go for it.

There's nothing gained in losing. Obviously getting to where they want to go, both with new talent, old talent, trades, development, and team play, it won't all happen on day one, but who doesn't know that?