2026 NBA draft thread

[Chicagojk]

You may be right ...and if you are, and everything after 5 is TRULY all the same caliber, then of course trading down is a plus, assuming you get 2 shots instead of one, all of the same value of player.

But I would have to be persuaded of that. I think the lure of "2 instead of 1" can be a temptation DESPITE there being a player you really think has emerged as the best choice. And the idea that "we do like one guy the most, but we will trade back, and STILL get the same player" is also a mind trick you can play on yourself, and end up screwing yourself out of the one player worth having when someone else surprises you and takes him. 

If they get ONE player who is all-star caliber, that's a win. Identify that guy, and if you can pick him, get him and don't look back. There is no such thing as picking that guy "too high" -- there will be tons of bad picks, and the goal is to make a great one, somehow or other.

Yeah, I am almost always against trading back to get more bites at the apple.   Will probably be the same this year.   Just get the best player on your board.   I don't like dropping back when other good teams pick players ahead of you.    It typically doesn't work out for the team trading back.

[Winter]

Yeah, I am almost always against trading back to get more bites at the apple.   Will probably be the same this year.   Just get the best player on your board.   I don't like dropping back when other good teams pick players ahead of you.    It typically doesn't work out for the team trading back.

Well let's remember how we got Lively in that 2023 draft. If I recall (someone tell me if I'm missing something here-this is from memory), we dropped down a space or two because we knew the other teams were not going to take Lively at that spot. We traded down a couple of spots and recieved a low first-round pick for that trade (Omax), and still got Lively.

Let imagine this draft now where somebody like Acuff is expected to go at about the 10 spot. We're drafting number 8 let's say, but the FO really wants Acuff. That same scenario could play out again. It's not likely of course, but that kind of thing happens a lot in a draft.

You need a good FO to pull that off (that may have been a Snyder move when he was here), but shit happens as they say.

[DanSchwartzgan]

 
5 What this team really needs the most, ideally, would be a top level ball-handling creator, who can play both ends, has some size, can make 3s -- but if that guy is in this draft, imo he hasn't really shown himself yet. All of these PG/G types have multiple flaws and tons of inconsistency, and bust potential.  

I'm struggling to fall in love with any of these guards.  If we get lucky and get a top four pick, then I'm taking one of the top four guys (none of which are pure PG's).  But, if we stay in the upper end of the top 10, these guys are going to be picked over a bit by the time we get one.

Flemings looks like a good starter, but nothing special (a lesser version of Fox) to my untrained eye.  Brown probably has the most upside, but I worry that he's got a bit of a "get mine" mentality.  I want the right mentality next to Flagg as much as I want the right talent.  I worry about Acuff's D, size and lack of steals.  He feels like a sixth man of the year/Dennis Smith Jr. type to me.  I have no ability to judge the athleticism of Wagler and Mullins, but they feel more complimentary than star.  I think that's why I'm trying to like Ament.  I can see his archetype working next to Flagg.  The question is whether he can live up to the best versions of that archetype or not.  

The 6-10 range of drafts is always problematic because teams are still trying to find that five-tool star from among players  with no obvious NBA ready tool.  At some point teams shift to guys with less upside, but have at least one NBA-ready skill.  Those are the guys who tend to find a career and the athletes you hope can put it all together are more bust-prone.

[mvossman]

I worry about Acuff's D, size and lack of steals.  He feels like a sixth man of the year/Dennis Smith Jr. type to me.

I think these are valid concerns but I don't see the Dennis Smith Jr comp.  Acuff is a totally different level offensively.  I think his floor is high quality 6th man, but I could also see him turning into something like a Darius Garland.  I would consider that a win coming out of this draft.

[Winter]

Two things. I agree with Mvossman on Acuff, but maybe just calling in a comparison to Dennis Smith jr that Dan mentioned threw me off a little. I can't see him as that.

The following is a good web page on Ament from the guys at No-ceilings. This is worth reading if you've been on the fence about Nate Ament in this draft.

https://www.noceilingsnba.com/p/nate-ame...pectations

[Chicagojk]

Well let's remember how we got Lively in that 2023 draft. If I recall (someone tell me if I'm missing something here-this is from memory), we dropped down a space or two because we knew the other teams were not going to take Lively at that spot. We traded down a couple of spots and recieved a low first-round pick for that trade (Omax), and still got Lively.

Let imagine this draft now where somebody like Acuff is expected to go at about the 10 spot. We're drafting number 8 let's say, but the FO really wants Acuff. That same scenario could play out again. It's not likely of course, but that kind of thing happens a lot in a draft.

You need a good FO to pull that off (that may have been a Snyder move when he was here), but shit happens as they say.

That is a good point and that did happen in the Lively draft.   The Mavs still got the guy they wanted though.   I think that is a little different than what I am talking about.  If the Mavs land at 7 and they are confident they can get they guy they want at 9, then that is a different story.   I was talking more about the fact if they wind up at 7 and then trade that for pick 13 and 22 (or something like that).  Those are the type of situations I want to stay away from.

[Winter]

That is a good point and that did happen in the Lively draft.   The Mavs still got the guy they wanted though.   I think that is a little different than what I am talking about.  If the Mavs land at 7 and they are confident they can get they guy they want at 9, then that is a different story.   I was talking more about the fact if they wind up at 7 and then trade that for pick 13 and 22 (or something like that).  Those are the type of situations I want to stay away from.

I guess there are different possibilities if you know you want, and if you know which players the other teams will be picking before you.

I can't imagine the Mavs just dropping down for the sake of another pick unless they knew the player they had targeted originally would still be there. Dropping 4-5 slots down or more seems like a terrible idea in this draft. That's too far. I don't believe any FO could predict that kind of drop very well. So I wasn't really thinking that would happen.

I probably should have clarified all that.

[Chicagojk]

I'm struggling to fall in love with any of these guards.  If we get lucky and get a top four pick, then I'm taking one of the top four guys (none of which are pure PG's).  But, if we stay in the upper end of the top 10, these guys are going to be picked over a bit by the time we get one.

Flemings looks like a good starter, but nothing special (a lesser version of Fox) to my untrained eye.  Brown probably has the most upside, but I worry that he's got a bit of a "get mine" mentality.  I want the right mentality next to Flagg as much as I want the right talent.  I worry about Acuff's D, size and lack of steals.  He feels like a sixth man of the year/Dennis Smith Jr. type to me.  I have no ability to judge the athleticism of Wagler and Mullins, but they feel more complimentary than star.  I think that's why I'm trying to like Ament.  I can see his archetype working next to Flagg.  The question is whether he can live up to the best versions of that archetype or not.  

The 6-10 range of drafts is always problematic because teams are still trying to find that five-tool star from among players  with no obvious NBA ready tool.  At some point teams shift to guys with less upside, but have at least one NBA-ready skill.  Those are the guys who tend to find a career and the athletes you hope can put it all together are more bust-prone.

I think the 5-9 is similar to a lot of drafts.  This one may be a little deeper and more upside, but the typical risk/reward types.    I can do a big list of strengths and negatives of all of them.    They are 19-20 year old kids where they should not be close to their final development.   I have seen Acuff the most (that means I have seen like two games).  I really like him.   It is concerning though at his height.   He has Luka/Reaves, SGA, Ant, Murray, etc who he would need to match up with.   That is a lot of skill and size that he will need to guard.   I think he is a bulldog though.  He really pushes the pace and in my limited viewing makes the best passes.   I am not saying he is my favorite of that group, but I think he deserves to be in that grouping.  I think the vision of Brown is my favorite of the group, but I will need to see more of him.  In his highlights he makes tough shots.  I think Acuff gets easier looks.    Wagler will need to really prove it to me.  I have a biased against guys who come from nowhere.  Not saying he won't be the best of the group, but his lack of explosion plays does concern me.   

I think there is a good chance that most of these guys in the 5-9 range may need some time to develop and be a reserve piece for a year or two.

[Chicagojk]

There has been some talk about Peyton Watson hitting free agency.  Watson was a late first/early second who came in as a top 15 recruit but hardly played as a freshman.  He was raw, not a great shooter, and a project.   It has worked out well for Denver.   When I have watched Arkansas play, a guy who has stuck out to me is Billy Richmond.   He is a soph but still 19.   He has some of the traits as Watson did.    The thing is he cannot shoot at all right now.    If he ever could be a respectable shooter, I think he is a good nba player.    Would probably enter the draft only if he was guaranteed a spot in the first round.   He is a guy to watch.  He is pretty fun.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm6v2Ry8A6s

I would also put Dame Sarr from Duke in this area as well. He should go back to school though. He has struggled a little this year but he also has the traits you want to gamble on with a late first imo.

[Smitty]

Tonight's slate:

#16 UNC vs #21 Louisville on ESPN at 6:00
Caleb Wilson vs Mikel Brown Jr.

#8 Kansas vs #2 Houston on ESPN at 8:00
Peterson & Bidunga vs Flemings & Cenac Jr.

[Chicagojk]

Tonight's slate:

#16 UNC vs #21 Louisville on ESPN at 6:00
Caleb Wilson vs Mikel Brown Jr.

#8 Kansas vs #2 Houston on ESPN at 8:00
Peterson & Bidunga vs Flemings & Cenac Jr.

Those are two good games.  I am going to try to watch.  Thanks.  Wilson is out right?

[DanSchwartzgan]

Two things. I agree with Mvossman on Acuff, but maybe just calling in a comparison to Dennis Smith jr that Dan mentioned threw me off a little. I can't see him as that.

The following is a good web page on Ament from the guys at No-ceilings. This is worth reading if you've been on the fence about Nate Ament in this draft.

https://www.noceilingsnba.com/p/nate-ame...pectations

There is a nice Burries mention in here also.  The little I've seen of him I like.  He starts to get into the conversation for me if we are picking in that 9/10+ area.  Good body and he was a top recruit.

[Smitty]

Wilson is out right?

Yeah, my bad. I did that last week also. The word was that he'd be back for the tournament though.

[vfromlmf]

Peterson looks like a guy who could average 26 ppg in the NBA tomorrow if you give him the shots. I worry about his impact on winning though. He draws a lot of attention and finds the open guy but I don't see him making plays for others in the classic sense. He goes to score when he can and passes out when he can't. That team is not connected at all and Peterson doesn't do anything to help. He might develop into a leader but he's not one now, or at least he didn't show it on Saturday. I see a classic professional scorer / bucket getter. I also see a jump shooter who could run hot / cold. The upside is an elite / effortless scorer who can close teams out at the end of games, but he seems like a lone wolf. He could turn out to be Zach Levine ... or more like Kobe.

Dybantsa can't miss. I'd take his motor over Peterson and live with the results. He's Siakam.

Boozer does so many good things that don't show up in the boxscore, and he lights up the boxscore too. I think he could be the best player on a championship team. The Kevin Love comp seems low. He's somewhere better than Sengun and not quite Jokic in terms of impact.

Didn't see Wilson play because he's hurt but I watched some clips including his matchup against Boozer. I see Chris Bosh.

Have no idea how to rank 5-10 unfortunately.

[Winter]

There is a nice Burries mention in here also.  The little I've seen of him I like.  He starts to get into the conversation for me if we are picking in that 9/10+ area.  Good body and he was a top recruit.

I completely agree with Burries. He's a physical SG with a decent shot and playing for a potential college champion. He doesn't feel like a star, but he does feel like at least a rotation player that might be a contributor right away. It's just hard to imagine him being in the draft spots we currently have.

[DanSchwartzgan]

I completely agree with Burries. He's a physical SG with a decent shot and playing for a potential college champion. He doesn't feel like a star, but he does feel like at least a rotation player that might be a contributor right away. It's just hard to imagine him being in the draft spots we currently have.

He's mocked at 14 at Tankathon right now.

Dallas could easily pass Memphis and then lose another spot as someone from 9-14 jumps past us.  I think the other thing that might help him is some of these PG's are going to fall when the mocks start thinking more about the actual teams drafting and less about draft stock.  It wouldn't shock me to see him mocked in the area of #10 as we get closer to the actual draft...especially if he has a great tournament.

[SweetFidelia]

Well let's remember how we got Lively in that 2023 draft. If I recall (someone tell me if I'm missing something here-this is from memory), we dropped down a space or two because we knew the other teams were not going to take Lively at that spot. We traded down a couple of spots and recieved a low first-round pick for that trade (Omax), and still got Lively.

Let imagine this draft now where somebody like Acuff is expected to go at about the 10 spot. We're drafting number 8 let's say, but the FO really wants Acuff. That same scenario could play out again. It's not likely of course, but that kind of thing happens a lot in a draft.

You need a good FO to pull that off (that may have been a Snyder move when he was here), but shit happens as they say.

Mavs officially drafted Cason Wallace @ #10 and sent him with Bertans to OKC for #12 Lively. Getting the pick used on Omax was the Mavs taking in Richaun Holmes from SAC. Maybe it was all in the works at the same time, but it was 2 completely separate transactions a couple hours apart. This was one of those days it looked like Nico had a clue, but I think may have been due to Dennis Lindsey being around.

[mvossman]

Mavs officially drafted Cason Wallace @ #10 and sent him with Bertans to OKC for #12 Lively. Getting the pick used on Omax was the Mavs taking in Richaun Holmes from SAC. Maybe it was all in the works at the same time, but it was 2 completely separate transactions a couple hours apart. This was one of those days it looked like Nico had a clue, but I think may have been due to Dennis Lindsey being around.

One point to make is that we generated a TPE with the Bertans trade and then used that TPE to take on Holmes, so they were connected.

[mvossman]

Boozer does so many good things that don't show up in the boxscore, and he lights up the boxscore too. I think he could be the best player on a championship team. The Kevin Love comp seems low. He's somewhere better than Sengun and not quite Jokic in terms of impact.

I am starting to convince myself that you could get away with at least 10 minutes (and maybe a lot more) with a Boozer/Flagg frontcourt.  You won't have elite rim protection but with Boozer size and Flagg all around ability I think they could make it work defensively.  They would be unstoppable offensively.

[DanSchwartzgan]

One point to make is that we generated a TPE with the Bertans trade and then used that TPE to take on Holmes, so they were related.

Could be similar since we generated the TPE in the AD trade and could use it to take in a player and get paid a pick to do so.  What might be different here is we could add the 30th pick to the deal so the other team isn't just selling a pick to move salary, they are moving down in the same draft to move salary.