2026 NBA draft thread

[Chicagojk]

Ugh. I hope he's wrong.

Not sure about brown but I think Wagler is 5 or 6.  It seems like he has worked out for clippers and Nets and two teams that could trade up for him in hawks and Mavs.  Personally I don’t think he makes it to 9.   If you want him, you need to trade up for him.  Won’t make it to a kings at 7. 

Brown is a little more fluid.   I think his range could be wider. Personally think the jockeying for 5-6 is for Wagler and Acuff. I don’t particually buy the brown stuff. Could be wrong though.

[KillerLeft]

Not sure about brown but I think Wagler is 5 or 6.  It seems like he has worked out for clippers and Nets and two teams that could trade up for him in hawks and Mavs.  Personally I don’t think he makes it to 9.   If you want him, you need to trade up for him.  Won’t make it to a kings at 7. 

Brown is a little more fluid.   I think his range could be wider.

Brown is the target in KillerLeft world. Wagler wouldn't suck. I have questions about whether or not he can be a lead guard, but I do think he's a good fit next to Kyrie while they figure that out (just like Burries). 

But my preference is to snag Brown, give him the ball on day 1 of camp and then watch he and Flagg live happily ever after.

[loki]

Brown is the target in KillerLeft world. Wagler wouldn't suck. I have questions about whether or not he can be a lead guard, but I do think he's a good fit next to Kyrie while they figure that out (just like Burries). 

But my preference is to snag Brown, give him the ball on day 1 of camp and then watch he and Flagg live happily ever after.

Kind of where I'm leaning too. Maybe I'm just letting the draft gurus hype Brown up too much, but the combination of size, shooting, and playmaking is pretty enticing. If the Mavs feel he's the right guy next to Coop I don't think they'd be crazy to do something like 9+29 LAL 1st (lightly protected) or 9+PJ to move up.

[hakeemfaan]

https://x.com/aph00ps/status/2068158752885239845?s=46

[cow]

4 days until Caleb Wilson is a Mav.  #believe

[KillerLeft]

Kind of where I'm leaning too. Maybe I'm just letting the draft gurus hype Brown up too much, but the combination of size, shooting, and playmaking is pretty enticing. If the Mavs feel he's the right guy next to Coop I don't think they'd be crazy to do something like 9+29 LAL 1st (lightly protected) or 9+PJ to move up.

I'm not sure I'd spend that much to move up a spot or 3, but to your point, if he's the guy they think is the lead guard it's not exactly crazy, either.

[RoyTarpleysGhost]

Brown is the target in KillerLeft world. Wagler wouldn't suck. I have questions about whether or not he can be a lead guard, but I do think he's a good fit next to Kyrie while they figure that out (just like Burries). 

But my preference is to snag Brown, give him the ball on day 1 of camp and then watch he and Flagg live happily ever after.

I don't know if our preference for a lead guard is outdated in today's NBA.  It seems like teams would love to run 4 wings and a center.  For the size and switchability.  

One of the things I liked least about last year was it felt like Kidd was trying to turn Cooper Flagg into Luka Doncic.  I'm not sure if that was just for the development of his offensive game or if that is the long term vision.  I'm hoping since they fired Kidd, that isn't the long term vision.  I don't want them to just give the ball to Flagg and clear out of the court and say go get us offense.  I DONT want Flagg to average 30/8/8.  He can be such a great two way player like Kawhi Leonard or Scottie Pippen.  I thought his defense last year was underwhelming because he had so much offensive responsibility.  

That's why I really want a lead guard.  A true point guard.  A guy that can feed Flagg in the right places at the right times.  But has a bigger responsibility to coordinate the offense and get everyone else involved also.  Nembhard has his limitations but when he was on the court, it was like oh this is how basketball is supposed to be played.

[Winter]

I don't know if our preference for a lead guard is outdated in today's NBA.  It seems like teams would love to run 4 wings and a center.  For the size and switchability.  

One of the things I liked least about last year was it felt like Kidd was trying to turn Cooper Flagg into Luka Doncic.  I'm not sure if that was just for the development of his offensive game or if that is the long term vision.  I'm hoping since they fired Kidd, that isn't the long term vision.  I don't want them to just give the ball to Flagg and clear out of the court and say go get us offense.  I DONT want Flagg to average 30/8/8.  He can be such a great two way player like Kawhi Leonard or Scottie Pippen.  I thought his defense last year was underwhelming because he had so much offensive responsibility.  

That's why I really want a lead guard.  A true point guard.  A guy that can feed Flagg in the right places at the right times.  But has a bigger responsibility to coordinate the offense and get everyone else involved also.  Nembhard has his limitations but when he was on the court, it was like oh this is how basketball is supposed to be played.

I'm not sure yet the Mavs have (or really need) a full blown philosophy about a lead guard. I'm not sure it's necessary just yet. You don't have to have a lead guard in this draft in my opinion. If it's what they want, that's fine. I expect them to attempt to acquire a PG before the season starts, and if I have to bet I would think they would get a PG somewhere in the draft, or possibly in a trade, but I don't think they have to have one at #9.

I think the Mavs are more likely to trade some players before the season starts - maybe during the draft. Their needs may fluctuate. I'm curious to see what their vision is, but I doubt we're going to see that vision on the first day of the draft. They are, after all, building a roster around Flagg - and it's the first year they've done that.

[DanSchwartzgan]

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.

I've struggled through this entire process over what I perceive to be holes in the games of these guys.

Flemings seems like a great guy and great leader.  I think the short arms matter.  He wasn't great at the rim (despite great athleticism) in college and I don't see that getting better in the NBA.  I won't complain if he is the pick, but I have worries about his star upside.

I'm much more worried about Wagler's lack of athleticism.  He's not good at finishing at the rim and can't get there anyway.  I see a better passing Duncan Robinson as a real possibility.

I don't like Acuff's D at all and I'm not a fan of what I hear when he opens his mouth.  I don't see a winning player in the playoffs.  In fact, I think he is a perfect 'get mine' guy on a bad team like Sacramento.

I do like Brown, but if he makes it to 9, then something is wrong...which means I don't like him any more and he might have a MPJ type fall.  I really think he's likely to go 5/6.

Burries to me seemed way off when he was being mocked in the 15-17 range earlier in the season.  I wish he had that one sure-fire NBA skill, but I do like his 'good at everything' even if he's great at nothing projection as a third best player on a good team.  He slots in nicely as a compliment to Flagg (and in a 3 guard rotation with Irving and Christie) as long as people aren't expecting star power.  I do think he will be a better pro than a college player and I tend to agree with you that his ceiling is higher than many project.   

With all that said, I've been much more open to trading down or looking elsewhere to add talent.  I'm not sure Flemings and Burries (if it works out that way) aren't so good that keep me from wanting two guys from the next tier...if they are the right two guys.  The issue is that you won't know that until after the picks are made.  You might have a good feel for who you will get at 12, but no way you know what will be there at 17.

[Mavs2021]

I've struggled through this entire process over what I perceive to be holes in the games of these guys.

Flemings seems like a great guy and great leader.  I think the short arms matter.  He wasn't great at the rim (despite great athleticism) in college and I don't see that getting better in the NBA.  I won't complain if he is the pick, but I have worries about his star upside.

I'm much more worried about Wagler's lack of athleticism.  He's not good at finishing at the rim and can't get there anyway.  I see a better passing Duncan Robinson as a real possibility.

I don't like Acuff's D at all and I'm not a fan of what I hear when he opens his mouth.  I don't see a winning player in the playoffs.  In fact, I think he is a perfect 'get mine' guy on a bad team like Sacramento.

I do like Brown, but if he makes it to 9, then something is wrong...which means I don't like him any more and he might have a MPJ type fall.  I really think he's likely to go 5/6.

Burries to me seemed way off when he was being mocked in the 15-17 range earlier in the season.  I wish he had that one sure-fire NBA skill, but I do like his 'good at everything' even if he's great at nothing projection as a third best player on a good team.  He slots in nicely as a compliment to Flagg (and in a 3 guard rotation with Irving and Christie) as long as people aren't expecting star power.  I do think he will be a better pro than a college player and I tend to agree with you that his ceiling is higher than many project.   

With all that said, I've been much more open to trading down or looking elsewhere to add talent.  I'm not sure Flemings and Burries (if it works out that way) aren't so good that keep me from wanting two guys from the next tier...if they are the right two guys.  The issue is that you won't know that until after the picks are made.  You might have a good feel for who you will get at 12, but no way you know what will be there at 17.

I agree with that whole guard assessment. I certainly don´t see the need to move up, unless it´s to get one of the top 4 guys. And that will be virtually impossible, unless the Bulls do something dumb. 

I also think the Mavs/Hawks are in the sweet spots to get plenty of offers to trade down. One of Burries/Flemings likely makes it to #12. I don´t worry about #17 much. A couple of Philon, Okorie, Anderson, Stirtz, Johnson, Carr, Steinbach, Lopez, Swain will be there at 17. If that is the added value for still getting the option to pick Burries/Flemings (or Ament) at #12 with a very high probability, at the cost of Joe/Wiggins it is a complete no brainer to me.

#17 is also feels like another sweet spot, where you might extract further value: Hornets sitting at #18 looking for a big, Spurs at #20 looking for a big, Pistons at #21 looking for a shooter. Could ignite another bidding war for Quaintance, Steinbach, Graves, Stirtz....

[HoosierDaddyKid]

Sources have recently brought up Mara’s conditioning more regularly, wondering if he’ll be more than a 25-minute-per-game guy at his peak. Michigan did an excellent job utilizing him in short stints to keep him fresh, allowing him to be at his best throughout the season. Coaches won’t be as excited about that luxury in the uptempo NBA, but don’t expect to see Mara slip out of the top 14.

New York Times

[HoosierDaddyKid]

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/4688...ts-players


Here's the latest of many ESPN NBA draft top 100 players. Subject to change by the 23rd. LOL

[Scott41theMavs]

Three days (and 10 or so hours) until the first round.

[Scott41theMavs]

I've struggled through this entire process over what I perceive to be holes in the games of these guys.

Flemings seems like a great guy and great leader.  I think the short arms matter.  He wasn't great at the rim (despite great athleticism) in college and I don't see that getting better in the NBA.  I won't complain if he is the pick, but I have worries about his star upside.

I'm much more worried about Wagler's lack of athleticism.  He's not good at finishing at the rim and can't get there anyway.  I see a better passing Duncan Robinson as a real possibility.

I don't like Acuff's D at all and I'm not a fan of what I hear when he opens his mouth.  I don't see a winning player in the playoffs.  In fact, I think he is a perfect 'get mine' guy on a bad team like Sacramento.

I do like Brown, but if he makes it to 9, then something is wrong...which means I don't like him any more and he might have a MPJ type fall.  I really think he's likely to go 5/6.

Burries to me seemed way off when he was being mocked in the 15-17 range earlier in the season.  I wish he had that one sure-fire NBA skill, but I do like his 'good at everything' even if he's great at nothing projection as a third best player on a good team.  He slots in nicely as a compliment to Flagg (and in a 3 guard rotation with Irving and Christie) as long as people aren't expecting star power.  I do think he will be a better pro than a college player and I tend to agree with you that his ceiling is higher than many project.   

With all that said, I've been much more open to trading down or looking elsewhere to add talent.  I'm not sure Flemings and Burries (if it works out that way) aren't so good that keep me from wanting two guys from the next tier...if they are the right two guys.  The issue is that you won't know that until after the picks are made.  You might have a good feel for who you will get at 12, but no way you know what will be there at 17.

Re: Flemings, in particular the bolded: That's my whole point. If they don't want him, it logically produces a concern that they're de-valuing *floor*. He has the highest floor. As for the bad measurements, they didn't keep him from playing the best defense of the five in college, and his ridiculous athletics at the combine essentially erase the bad anatomical measurements. 

BR released their "final" mock draft with trades yesterday, and had the Mavs trading down with OKC (straight up 9 for 12 and 17, which is probably the most fair) and had the Mavs coming away with Burries, Quintaince, and Maleek Thomas. That would be just fine. If the Mavs do their intel as was done in the Lively draft and are 100% that Burries is going to be there because Milwaukee and GS were dumb, then by all means do the trade. Otherwise, no.

Edit: Re: Acuff: There's zero doubt in my mind that he's going to be a star in the NBA - a surer thing than Wilson, tbh. It's also certain that he will not be able to play D. The question is, will he be a superstar-minus-D like Dirk, Curry, Luka, and Brunson? Or will he be a star-minus-D like Trae Young or Beard who just isn't worth trying to build around? Or somewhere in between like Lillard?

[hakeemfaan]

With Acuff, I'm going to go by what some experienced college coaches who have accurately predicted future success in the NBA have said...that he will be a star. Ideally, yes, you do want all 5 starters to be solid defensively, but if any position can be hid, it's a PG. Plus we just saw Brunson being a centerpiece of a title run, and we can spin it however we want, but Brunson can be targeted defensively. You try to minimize his negatives by building a solid defensive team around him, like the Knicks did, and like the Warriors did with Curry.

Wagler has the drive. When you have the drive and talent, then athletic concerns can be overcome. Even when he had a bad 3 pt game against UConn when they were eliminated, his overall shooting % was still not bad and he got 8 rebounds. He found a way to contribute.

Flemings has talent. I've been through many iterations of this discussion group for the last 3 decades, and one thing has been consistent. My firm belief that mid range shooters are more difficult to guard in the playoffs than standalone 3 pt shooters. Flemings has that. An average shooter can practice hard and become a decent 3 pt shooter because the distance is the same. Midrange requires a lot more natural ability.

I know all these guys have negatives, but IMO there is a clear tier in this draft (Burries is in the above tier), and I don't feel confident with the next tier. As I mentioned, sure a few years from now someone lower might be better than all of these guys, but you are really going out on a limb or are a super GM if you can identify that and take that person with the top 10 pick given what we know as of today. Also, with the Mavs having very few good picks (heck OKC and SA have swaps with us I believe...so sad), they can't afford to go wrong on this one.


I have more concerns about Brown than any of the above guys because Brown blew hot and cold and his overall shooting % is not very good.

Coming to Ament, I know Killer will literally kill me, but if the Mavs want to take a chance , Mara is the guy that I will take all day over Ament (even though I know he might never play more than 30 mins a game). Even accounting for his upside there is nothing that makes me jump out of my seat with Ament or anything that tells me he projects to be a star, whereas some of Mara's highlights wrt passing and recovery to block shots are just amazing.

[Scott41theMavs]

With Acuff, I'm going to go by what some experienced college coaches who have accurately predicted future success in the NBA have said...that he will be a star.  Ideally, yes, you do want all 5 starters to be solid defensively, but if any position can be hid, it's a PG.  Plus we just saw Brunson being a centerpiece of a title run, and we can spin it however we want, but Brunson can be targeted defensively.  You try to minimize his negatives by building a solid defensive team around him, like the Knicks did, and like the Warriors did with Curry.

Wagler has the drive. When you have the drive and talent, then athletic concerns can be overcome. Even when he had a bad 3 pt game against UConn when they were eliminated, his overall shooting % was still not bad and he got 8 rebounds. He found a way to contribute.

Flemings has talent. I've been through many iterations of this discussion group for the last 3 decades, and one thing has been consistent. My firm belief that mid range shooters are more difficult to guard in the playoffs than standalone 3 pt shooters.  Flemings has that.  An average shooter can practice hard and become a decent 3 pt shooter because the distance is the same.  Midrange requires a lot more natural ability.

I know all these guys have negatives, but IMO there is a clear tier in this draft (Burries is in the above tier), and I don't feel confident with the next tier. As I mentioned, sure a few years from now someone lower might be better than all of these guys, but you are really going out on a limb or are a super GM if you can identify that and take that person with the top 10 pick given what we know as of today.  Also, with the Mavs having very few good picks (heck OKC and SA have swaps with us I believe...so sad), they can't afford to go wrong on this one.


I have more concerns about Brown than any of the above guys because Brown blew hot and cold and his overall shooting % is not very good.

Coming to Ament, I know Killer will literally kill me, but if the Mavs want to take a chance , Mara is the guy that I will take all day over Ament (even though I know he might never play more than 30 mins a game).  Even accounting for his upside there is nothing that makes me jump out of my seat with Ament or anything that tells me he projects to be a star, whereas some of Mara's highlights wrt passing and recovery to block shots are just amazing.

Very well said. I am in nearly 100% agreement with everything aside from some nuancing of your comments on Brown.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Re: Flemings, in particular the bolded: That's my whole point. If they don't want him, it logically produces a concern that they're de-valuing *floor*. He has the highest floor. As for the bad measurements, they didn't keep him from playing the best defense of the five in college, and his ridiculous athletics at the combine essentially erase the bad anatomical measurements. 
 

I'm not 100% there on the floor for Flemings.  I think he can overcome the bad measurments defensively.  Speed and athleticism can make up for the missing 5" of arm length.   But, the slight frame and short arms do matter in finishing at the rim.  They already mattered some in College.

[mvossman]

I'm not 100% there on the floor for Flemings.  I think he can overcome the bad measurments defensively.  Speed and athleticism can make up for the missing 5" of arm length.   But, the slight frame and short arms do matter in finishing at the rim.  They already mattered some in College.

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.

[mvossman]

I'm much more worried about Wagler's lack of athleticism.  He's not good at finishing at the rim and can't get there anyway.  I see a better passing Duncan Robinson as a real possibility.

He was not elite finishing, but he got to the rim a lot and he had a high free throw rate (he was not afraid of contact).  He may need to leverage screens more than some players but I think calling him a passing Duncan Robinson is really underselling his offensive game.

[hakeemfaan]

Flemings at 5 could be a concern. If he drops to 9, you just run to the podium and grab him.

I'd rather have someone I absolutely know can be a lead guard, who has dropped due to wingspan concerns, than a combo guard who might or might not pan out as a lead guard.

Wingspan is more in play on defense, and his defense is good anyway. His passing is also very good even on nights when his shot isn't falling.

Again, all guys in any tier have negatives. It's just that in the highest tier their positives overwhelmingly dwarves the negatives, but as the tiers get lower, the difference among the positives and negatives get lesser and lesser.

I don't know where he will go, and all indications are that the Mavs were not overwhelmed by him and most likely won't draft him. I can agree that he doesn't belong high in the 2nd tier. However, IMO Flemings doesn't belong in the 3rd tier either. He is firmly in the 2nd tier even if in the 8,9, 10 range. If he drops below that tier, someone will get a real steal...one who, if he stays injury free, will have a long and extremely productive career as a starter, even with all his so called physical negatives.