2026 NBA draft thread

[Winter]

It's a great problem to have. The best thing about it may be that Dusty may have a better sense of this than anyone.

[KillerLeft]

I said it somewhere in the heat of the live reacting, pages ago, but the Morez Johnson Jr pick should be seen as a win for anyone who argued in favor of "best player available" as an ABSOLUTE draft strategy.

He was obviously the player they liked best based on who went off the board, and we KNOW that because in terms of immediate fit, Burries would've been a no-brainer by comparison. So clearly, the Mavs think Johnson is a better player, prospect, whatever, than Burries. That much is beyond dispute.

I also think it's pretty clear, thinking through all of the rumors these past weeks, that the Mavs themselves leaked some things in an effort to get someone to trade up with them. I'm 99% sure that's where both the Mara (OKC) and Ament (MIL) rumors came from, and possibly even some of the Burries stuff, too. Remember about a week ago when it came out that the Burries interest in Dallas was "mutual?" That might've been aimed right at GS, honestly. Why were they attempting these games? Because they knew how picks 1-8 were going to go (we all did, basically) and had decided Johnson was their guy. They were trying to get 1-2 spots lower and pick something up for the trouble. Ultimately, it didn't work, but I'm pretty confident they tried.

SO...kudos to them for taking the guy they wanted. Call it a reach if you want, but if so it's only by 1-2 spots, and there are rumors that other teams were trying to trade up for Johnson, specifically, so I'm not even sure how safe a trade down would've been.

In my opinion, anyone who thinks "BPA" is the way to go, full stop, has to be satisfied with this. In my mind, this was CLEARLY the best choice left on the board at 9 in a vacuum, depending on what you feel about the upside of Ament or how high you are on Burries' potential. I sure wasn't interested in Lendenborg or Mara, and not long after that we got the 2nd run on PG's.

A team drafting for fit might've been tempted to reach for Stritz, for example. THAT would've been a reach, and possibly even a semi-defensible one, given the circumstances.

[KillerLeft]

It's a great problem to have. The best thing about it may be that Dusty may have a better sense of this than anyone.

He definitely has a great sense of what the player is capable of. I suuuuuure hope he's got a good sense over what works in the pro game. We'll see.

[ThisIStheYear]

No, no...I understood that part and agree. 

What's with the "he's not a center" part? I think Johnson has some positional flex (that's a good thing) but I'm pretty confident the 5 will end up being where he makes his money.

He’ll play some center but I’m pretty sure they’re going to try him at the 4. The coach loves a big front line. I wouldn’t be surprised to see PJ at the 3 with Flagg playing guard in some lineups.

[KillerLeft]

He’ll play some center but I’m pretty sure they’re going to try him at the 4. The coach loves a big front line. I wouldn’t be surprised to see PJ at the 3 with Flagg playing guard in some lineups.

Yeah, hopefully May isn't that tragically bad at his job or we're all in for a lot of sports-misery.

[mvossman]

Which is why they leaked the Ament stuff. 

Johnson wasn't a huge reach, because reports are that other teams were trying to trade up into the Mavs' range to get him. However, I do think Dallas made a draft day play to switch with MIL at 10 or OKC at 12, and I think the Ament stuff was meant to motivate MIL to play ball...BECAUSE Dallas had already decided to draft Johnson. 

It's really just a matter of how much you believe in Burries. The only two players you can say Dallas "passed on" with a straight face are Burries and Lendenborg, and Lendenborg is very, very obviously not who you draft to build around Cooper Flagg for several reasons. 

The Mavs simply must not have wanted Burries. That's the long and short of it.

I don't think its so much that Mavs didn't want Burries, I think they just really, really liked Morez.  It also shows they had zero concerns about fit with this roster other than Flagg.  For a team with too many bigs/forwards and not enough guard help, Burries would have really helped to balance out the roster.  You still could have made an argument for trading away Gafford and acquiring a 6ith man.  Now you probably need to do more than that to have a functional roster.

[Winter]

I said it somewhere in the heat of the live reacting, pages ago, but the Morez Johnson Jr pick should be seen as a win for anyone who argued in favor of "best player available" as an ABSOLUTE draft strategy.

He was obviously the player they liked best based on who went off the board, and we KNOW that because in terms of immediate fit, Burries would've been a no-brainer by comparison. So clearly, the Mavs think Johnson is a better player, prospect, whatever, than Burries. That much is beyond dispute.

I also think it's pretty clear, thinking through all of the rumors these past weeks, that the Mavs themselves leaked some things in an effort to get someone to trade up with them. I'm 99% sure that's where both the Mara (OKC) and Ament (MIL) rumors came from, and possibly even some of the Burries stuff, too. Remember about a week ago when it came out that the Burries interest in Dallas was "mutual?" That might've been aimed right at GS, honestly. Why were they attempting these games? Because they knew how picks 1-8 were going to go (we all did, basically) and had decided Johnson was their guy. They were trying to get 1-2 spots lower and pick something up for the trouble. Ultimately, it didn't work, but I'm pretty confident they tried.

SO...kudos to them for taking the guy they wanted. Call it a reach if you want, but if so it's only by 1-2 spots, and there are rumors that other teams were trying to trade up for Johnson, specifically, so I'm not even sure how safe a trade down would've been.

In my opinion, anyone who thinks "BPA" is the way to go, full stop, has to be satisfied with this. In my mind, this was CLEARLY the best choice left on the board at 9 in a vacuum, depending on what you feel about the upside of Ament or how high you are on Burries' potential. I sure wasn't interested in Lendenborg or Mara, and not long after that we got the 2nd run on PG's.

A team reaching for fit might've been tempted to reach for Stritz, for example. THAT would've been a reach, and possible even a semi-defensible one, given the circumstances.

Good post. I would add that Johnson is the BPA when you have Flagg as your "centerpiece." A different team with a different roster could argue for another player (maybe), but the one thing I saw last season is that Flagg needs the ball. Moritz Johnson doesn't subtract from that.

[dirkfansince1998]

Not like May is obsessed with big lineups. If we are looking at his entire track record this years giant lineups are more of an outlier. Florida Atlantic actually played a lot of small ball or lineups with one legit big and four guards.

[KillerLeft]

I don't think its so much that Mavs didn't want Burries, I think they just really, really liked Morez.  It also shows they had zero concerns about fit with this roster other than Flagg.  For a team with too many bigs/forwards and not enough guard help, Burries would have really helped to balance out the roster.  You still could have made an argument for trading away Gafford and acquiring a 6ith man.  Now you probably need to do more than that to have a functional roster.

Fair on the wording, but my point was they didn't want Burries relative to Johnson. So we basically agree.

[cow]

If I am guessing, the next C on the way out may be Lively rather than Gafford.

I'm not in the group that is desperate to trade Gafford somehow and sees him as a pure liability, and while he has often been made available (at least by people who are theorizing trades THEY think could happen), I'm not convinced the Mavs have some desperation -- I see them as open to the right deal that returns value that they need (a swap of talent for talent), but not just to move him. Some forget how desperate we were to get a good rotation-level or starting center just a few years ago. Now that we have one, because he's not perfect in every way (then again, who is), there's this mad rush to get rid of him. Not smart, imo. Mavs NEED a center who is a beast like that, at times in the very worst way. Most teams do.

F Gump on the same page all the time is starting to freak me out.  While Gafford might be on the way out, I think taking Rez says a lot more about the future of DLive and the organization's confidence on him being able to stay on the court. With a new contract looming, I'm not sure how to properly value him. While trading him takes away that decision, how to value him as a trade piece is probably as complicated.

[Winter]

It's an interesting discussion because my interest in Burries was about the obvious - spacing and perimeter shooting. In re-thinking it, complementing the defense without taking the ball away from Flagg on offense is perhaps more impactful. We can solve the perimeter shooting later hopefully.

I also think it's a cultural thing. Masai and May knew all about Johnson's work ethic and leadership - which is an unkown factor with most draft picks.

[KillerLeft]

While Gafford might be on the way out, I think taking Rez says a lot more about the future of DLive and the organization's confidence on him being able to stay on the court. With a new contract looming, I'm not sure how to properly value him.

I don't think this is a crazy take, and I agree it's smart to start preparing for the possible eventuality of Lively not ever coming back to life. 

But we factually know they've been shopping Gafford. Like, we KNOW it. I can't tell you how different places I've heard and read this. If Gafford is here this season it will be because they COULDN'T trade him, not because they didn't try. I don't think it's going to be that hard to move him, but his contract does worry me a bit. If that ends up being the case, I'll view that extension as the last bit of sabotage Harrison inflicted upon us before he was shown the door.

[mvossman]

I said it somewhere in the heat of the live reacting, pages ago, but the Morez Johnson Jr pick should be seen as a win for anyone who argued in favor of "best player available" as an ABSOLUTE draft strategy.

He was obviously the player they liked best based on who went off the board, and we KNOW that because in terms of immediate fit, Burries would've been a no-brainer by comparison. So clearly, the Mavs think Johnson is a better player, prospect, whatever, than Burries. That much is beyond dispute.

I also think it's pretty clear, thinking through all of the rumors these past weeks, that the Mavs themselves leaked some things in an effort to get someone to trade up with them. I'm 99% sure that's where both the Mara (OKC) and Ament (MIL) rumors came from, and possibly even some of the Burries stuff, too. Remember about a week ago when it came out that the Burries interest in Dallas was "mutual?" That might've been aimed right at GS, honestly. Why were they attempting these games? Because they knew how picks 1-8 were going to go (we all did, basically) and had decided Johnson was their guy. They were trying to get 1-2 spots lower and pick something up for the trouble. Ultimately, it didn't work, but I'm pretty confident they tried.

SO...kudos to them for taking the guy they wanted. Call it a reach if you want, but if so it's only by 1-2 spots, and there are rumors that other teams were trying to trade up for Johnson, specifically, so I'm not even sure how safe a trade down would've been.

In my opinion, anyone who thinks "BPA" is the way to go, full stop, has to be satisfied with this. In my mind, this was CLEARLY the best choice left on the board at 9 in a vacuum, depending on what you feel about the upside of Ament or how high you are on Burries' potential. I sure wasn't interested in Lendenborg or Mara, and not long after that we got the 2nd run on PG's.

A team drafting for fit might've been tempted to reach for Stritz, for example. THAT would've been a reach, and possibly even a semi-defensible one, given the circumstances.

Crazy I just posted roughly this same thing.

The biggest argument for him not being a reach is that we actually have his college coach, who knows more about those three players than anyone, and he (presumably) signed off on Morez ahead of the other two guys who went two picks later.

I'm not convinced Burries isn't the better player.  I think he has a real good chance of being a third option on a contending roster while providing secondary playmaking and plus defense.  I think Morez is going to have to be able to stretch defenses with his shot in order to be better than that.

[BigDirk41]

F Gump on the same page all the time is starting to freak me out.  While Gafford might be on the way out, I think taking Rez says a lot more about the future of DLive and the organization's confidence on him being able to stay on the court. With a new contract looming, I'm not sure how to properly value him.  While trading him takes away that decision, how to value him as a trade piece is probably as complicated.

I wouldn't be comfortable throwing money at Lively. Not sure how they come to terms to be honest, but can't pay him for his potential when his injury history outweighs his potential so far. I'd probably trade him if they can get good value. Otherwise he needs to take less money to stay. They can't afford to give him a huge contract and then he sits like usual.

[KillerLeft]

It's an interesting discussion because my interest in Burries was about the obvious - spacing and perimeter shooting. In re-thinking it, complementing the defense without taking the ball away from Flagg on offense is perhaps more impactful.

I also think it's a cultural thing. Masai and May knew all about Johnson's work ethic and leadership - which is an unkown factor with most draft picks.

That's where the disconnect is. I think in order for the offense to improve, the ball MUST be "taken away from Flagg." I don't mean that in as extreme of a way as it might seem with that sentence, because he's obviously going to touch the ball a ton, but I have almost no interest in seeing him play as the MAIN initiator of offensive action. 

I like the Johnson pick, but this team will continue to be a joke until they have a topflight ball-handler in the mix. I'd argue that's in the team's interest on the defensive end, even.

[Winter]

I'm not convinced Burries isn't the better player.  I think he has a real good chance of being a third option on a contending roster while providing secondary playmaking and plus defense.  I think Morez is going to have to be able to stretch defenses with his shot in order to be better than that.

I'm not sure Moritz has to do it. 

I just think we need players that can do it.

[cow]

I don't think this is a crazy take, and I agree it's smart to start preparing for the possible eventuality of Lively not ever coming back to life. 

But we factually know they've been shopping Gafford. Like, we KNOW it. I can't tell you how different places I've heard and read this. If Gafford is here this season it will be because they COULDN'T trade him, not because they didn't try. I don't think it's going to be that hard to move him, but his contract does worry me a bit. If that ends up being the case, I'll view that extension as the last bit of sabotage Harrison inflicted upon us before he was shown the door.

I think the greater point would be that just because Gafford is being shopped, doesn't secure Lively's future.  I'd also amend your thoughts a bit, it's not that they couldn't trade him, but rather couldn't find value in trading him.   I don't think he's a negative asset or could even be judged as a neutral one.

[KillerLeft]

I'm not convinced Burries isn't the better player.  I think he has a real good chance of being a third option on a contending roster while providing secondary playmaking and plus defense.  I think Morez is going to have to be able to stretch defenses with his shot in order to be better than that.

For sure, but the Mavs were convinced, and that's the point. I think SOME front offices faced with a similar set of circumstances would've chosen Burries DESPITE having Johnson ranked higher on their board. 

Me, personally, I think fit needs to be taken into account. I like the pick, but probably wouldn't have done this. But, since I do like Johnson so much, I'm gaining respect for how singularly focused they seem to be on their process. 

Cuban/Nelson would NOT have made this pick.

[KillerLeft]

I don't think he's a negative asset or could even be judged as a neutral one.

I hope you're right!

[Winter]

That's where the disconnect is. I think in order for the offense to improve, the ball MUST be "taken away from Flagg." I don't mean that in as extreme of a way as it might seem with that sentence, because he's obviously going to touch the ball a ton, but I have almost no interest in seeing him play as the MAIN initiator of offensive action. 

Yeah, I don't either. I didn't mean to give that impression. We need to surround Flagg with players who can shoot. But those players exist. I'm not sure there's many guys like Moritz though.