2026 NBA draft thread

[F Gump]

Not really a fan of Uriji, but using him as an illustration of how today’s bright, shiny winner can quickly turn into tomorrow’s dull, boring loser.

All it takes is a couple of misses to tank a GM’s perceived prowess. How’s Danny Ainge doing? At one point, he could do no wrong.

Is there a regression to the mean?

"Regression to the mean" applies when the result is highly dependent on chance. I don't think roster-building and cap management are luck-based disciplines. 

Ainge? His reputation was almost entirely built on the trades of a singular summer, at a time he was not revered - in fact, iirc he was on the hot seat, and then pulled off 2 great one-sided trades about the same time that won a title. But other than that, was he a great GM, or merely a GM living off of a great reputation? That was his ONLY title, and there was only one other trip to the Finals (2 years later). 

Presti, please.

[Winter]

Acuff took over the game late against a good High Point team.

36 points, 6 assists. He scored 12 of Arkansas's last 15 points with about 3 minutes left.

Wagler and Flemings had games that would qualify in the "pretty good" category. Boozer struggled in the first half against TCU but got it going in the second half (19 points but 5 TOs)

[Mavs2021]

Acuff really is a bucket. Seems the safest bet from all the guards. I´m starting to like some of the performances I see from the guys in the #30 range. Had my eyes on Swain and Thomas before, and there are really good arguments, to trade up the Phoenix pick or acquire an additional 2nd round pick for both.

Right now I`m thinking

Take Acuff #6
Take Swain #30
Take Thomas #36 (trade two future 2nds, since Thunder have too many picks again, FGump would say the future Mavs GM is doing them a solid)
Take Krivas #49

Swain is basically living in Dallas already, which should make his transition easier. Him and Krivas are too old to defer another year for a weaker draft. Thomas might be tempted to push back another year, but with Acuff already in and a little smart contract construction you convince him, too.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

"Regression to the mean" applies when the result is highly dependent on chance. I don't think roster-building and cap management are luck-based disciplines. 

Ainge? His reputation was almost entirely built on the trades of a singular summer, at a time he was not revered - in fact, iirc he was on the hot seat, and then pulled off 2 great one-sided trades about the same time that won a title. But other than that, was he a great GM, or merely a GM living off of a great reputation? That was his ONLY title, and there was only one other trip to the Finals (2 years later). 

Presti, please.

You can also acknowledge that Brad Stevens has done a better job than Ainge after he took the reins.

[HoosierDaddyKid]

You keep pimping Ujiri for the job. Is he your preference? Or is he just a famous name distraction to keep from having to figure out who YOU think the Mavs should pursue?

He's certainly not mine. 

I think he did some good things, but lots of GMs do something good at some point. For Ujiri, (a) he had one big swing that worked out to win a title, but then just as quickly Kawhi was gone and the Raps' path went into the toilet, (b) he made some good draft picks (he was better than most at draft selections) but couldn't figure how how to make the pieces fit to be an elite team (other than when the infusion of Kawhi for a year fixed everything), and © his trade results didn't really pop to improve the team, with some of them simply making them worse.

I want the best. 

Presti, please.

Nice try. But I seriously doubt OKC will let Presti go to another team. They'll offer him a share of the team first, if he doesn't have it already.

[DallasMaverick]

"Regression to the mean" applies when the result is highly dependent on chance. I don't think roster-building and cap management are luck-based disciplines. 

Ainge? His reputation was almost entirely built on the trades of a singular summer, at a time he was not revered - in fact, iirc he was on the hot seat, and then pulled off 2 great one-sided trades about the same time that won a title. But other than that, was he a great GM, or merely a GM living off of a great reputation? That was his ONLY title, and there was only one other trip to the Finals (2 years later). 

Presti, please.

…and then there was Monty Williams, who could do no wrong. Got himself a crazy good $$$ contract.

And then he wasn’t…

The issue is assigning all the credit or all the blame to a single individual. If you’d like to assign all the credit for OKC’s success to Presti, well, be my guest.

My view is that success or failure is due to the confluence of a myriad of factors that are often really hard to identify. And often, it’s a pure crapshoot to guess who will perform at a high level and who will be just mediocre, or a bust. Every NBA GM has hits and misses.

Because the sample size is relatively small, a significant hit or miss can completely skew a GM’s track record and reputation. What would Presti’s reputation be if he hadn’t made the Paul George trade? Or if Shai had turned out to be merely average?

[DanSchwartzgan]

Slightly Biased put out a video recently that kind of encapsulates how I feel about Acuff.

Part way through this he asks if someone came back from the future and gave you the choice of drafting Lillard or Derrick White, which would you take?  Obviously Lillard, especially if you are a team with a need for an offensive catalyst.  But, Portland was never good enough defensively to go places in the playoffs.  Whereas players like White and Jrue (combo guards with high-IQ’s and good advanced stats) have contributed to championships.  Sizzle or Substance.  With Flagg here, I probably go substance.  

I’m not sure who he meant when he brought up Derrick White, but Burries gets compared to him a bit.  I like Burries.  I’m not positive I take him at 7 or 8, but the comparison brings out something else about Acuff.  If he’s your guy, you have to surround him in a certain way to be a championship contender.  There can’t be any other defensive holes when he’s on the court.  But, someone like Burries is much easier to build around.  The offensive upside may not be as great, but he has no visible weaknesses that you have to offset.  Building a team around him and Flagg would be pretty easy IMHO.  Building an offensive juggernaut around Acuff and Flagg would be easier, but as good as Flagg is, the standard should be higher.

  https://youtu.be/EI-H0YrAEBQ?si=XAKPBFhEOB5rUL2B

[DanSchwartzgan]

Nice try. But I seriously doubt OKC will let Presti go to another team. They'll offer him a share of the team first, if he doesn't have it already.

They won’t.  Everyone knows it, even FG.  It is either a schtick or an extreme position designed to make a point (like demanding Atlanta trade the pick they got from NOP in any Davis deal).  We all knew that was never going to happen, but you don’t start negotiations with what is realistic.  The best way to get what you want is to start with the outlandish and work your way back to the middle.  He who defines the debate wins.

[Mavs2021]

Slightly Biased put out a video recently that kind of encapsulates how I feel about Acuff.

Part way through this he asks if someone came back from the future and gave you the choice of drafting Lillard or Derrick White, which would you take?  Obviously Lillard, especially if you are a team with a need for an offensive catalyst.  But, Portland was never good enough defensively to go places in the playoffs.  Whereas players like White and Jrue (combo guards with high-IQ’s and good advanced stats) have contributed to championships.  Sizzle or Substance.  With Flagg here, I probably go substance.  

What kind of a question is that? Obviously Lillard.

1. White was not even drafted by Boston.
2. We don´t have Brown, Tatum, Holiday, Horford and Porzingis.
3. Lillard led the Blazers to the WCF with McCollum, Harkless, Hood and Meyers-Leonard.
4.

• Damian Lillard (via Blazers)
  

Trail Blazers receive:

• Deandre Ayton (via Suns)
  
• Toumani Camara (via Suns)
  
• Jrue Holiday (via Bucks)
  
• 2029 1st-round pick (via Bucks)
  
• Two first-round pick swaps with Bucks (2028, 2030)
  

So Blazers got Jrue Holiday, the new Derrick White in Toumani Camara, plus a former #1 pick, plus a 1st round pick, plus two more swaps they´ll likely execute.

[Winter]

Slightly Biased put out a video recently that kind of encapsulates how I feel about Acuff.

Part way through this he asks if someone came back from the future and gave you the choice of drafting Lillard or Derrick White, which would you take?  Obviously Lillard, especially if you are a team with a need for an offensive catalyst.  But, Portland was never good enough defensively to go places in the playoffs.  Whereas players like White and Jrue (combo guards with high-IQ’s and good advanced stats) have contributed to championships.  Sizzle or Substance.  With Flagg here, I probably go substance.  

I’m not sure who he meant when he brought up Derrick White, but Burries gets compared to him a bit.  I like Burries.  I’m not positive I take him at 7 or 8, but the comparison brings out something else about Acuff.  If he’s your guy, you have to surround him in a certain way to be a championship contender.  There can’t be any other defensive holes when he’s on the court.  But, someone like Burries is much easier to build around.  The offensive upside may not be as great, but he has no visible weaknesses that you have to offset.  Building a team around him and Flagg would be pretty easy IMHO.  Building an offensive juggernaut around Acuff and Flagg would be easier, but as good as Flagg is, the standard should be higher.

  https://youtu.be/EI-H0YrAEBQ?si=XAKPBFhEOB5rUL2B

I think the other part of this is that Acuff may very well have supplanted Flemings as the top true PG in the draft. In which case, he's likely gone when the Mavs pick. We may see a variety of options now. You could see a draft discussion that includes Flemings, Wagler, Ament, or Burries - and if Burries has a good run in the tournament, it's not a stretch where the Mavs pick in my opinion. Or you could trade down for him.

All of these players are still playing in the tournament.

[Scott41theMavs]

They won’t.  Everyone knows it, even FG.  It is either a schtick or an extreme position designed to make a point (like demanding Atlanta trade the pick they got from NOP in any Davis deal).  We all knew that was never going to happen, but you don’t start negotiations with what is realistic.  The best way to get what you want is to start with the outlandish and work your way back to the middle.  He who defines the debate wins.

Nah. I'll say it again, there's no salary cap on NBA execs. Moreover, this ownership team, if they're not selling, owes this fanbase the moon. If the Mavs offer Luka supermax money to Presti to become our GM, there is a 0% chance he doesn't come here and that "won't let him go" OKC gets to keep him. And that's what had better happen. If Presti is an idiot who prefers to live in OKC (once again, 0% chance, since he isn't an idiot), then offer the same to Stevens. If he won't come, then make a reasonable offer on Lindsay, and the fanbase still might not lynch them.

[Smitty]

I think the other part of this is that Acuff may very well have supplanted Flemings as the top true PG in the draft. In which case, he's likely gone when the Mavs pick. We may see a variety of options now. You could see a draft discussion that includes Flemings, Wagler, Ament, or Burries - and if Burries has a good run in the tournament, it's not a stretch where the Mavs pick in my opinion. Or you could trade down for him.

All of these players are still playing in the tournament.

Acuff is my top PG but I have a hard time seeing him being a Maverick. If the Mavs get lottery luck and jump into the top 4, I don’t think they pass on AJ, DP, Boozer, Wilson. If they pick at 7/8, I don’t think Acuff is there, and if he is, he’s by far the best available.

[DanSchwartzgan]

If the Mavs offer Luka supermax money to Presti to become our GM, there is a 0% chance he doesn't come here and that "won't let him go" OKC gets to keep him.

Interesting that this came up on DLLS today.  Presti is Stein’s example.  One note related to your often stated demand that this needs to happen before the draft…Stein makes the point that Presti and ‘before the draft’ are not both possible.  If it is Presti, it takes longer.  If it is quick, it isn’t Presti.

https://youtu.be/Qc-vpJ1irDs?si=O0f6NfYZXjOxF2ZL

[F Gump]

Interesting that this came up on DLLS today.  Presti is Stein’s example.  One note related to your often stated demand that this needs to happen before the draft…Stein makes the point that Presti and ‘before the draft’ are not both possible.  If it is Presti, it takes longer.  If it is quick, it isn’t Presti.

https://youtu.be/Qc-vpJ1irDs?si=O0f6NfYZXjOxF2ZL

Great video ^ to explain the dynamics at play in getting a GM. Whoever has not watched it, should watch it.

"If it is Presti, it takes longer [than the draft].  If it is quick, it isn’t Presti." -- Both very true, and Stein's underlying point was even broader than that, aligning to my exact thoughts about how Presti needs to be the guy.

Stein noted the Mavs and Dumont appear to be approaching their GM pursuit with a goal of getting someone at the very top echelon of GMs. They want a proven expert. Which they should.

But where do you find such a guy? AS STEIN NOTED, that proven expert NBA GM guy is already employed, using his skills on an NBA team! That truth is why the pushback that 'You can't get Presti because he's employed elsewhere" has been meaningless to me, since that is almost certain to be true of EVERY potential candidate who is an expert GM. You can find a not-so-good one who is not employed, of course, if you will settle for that. (No thanks.)

That truth means there will be big obstacles to ALL of the BEST. They ALL will be already employed, will be hard to get, and it may require a delay in when you can get him. It's not just Presti.

So if you don't want to settle for "a GM-type guy" and you truly want The Expert, it's going to look impossible from here. Hello Finley, Hi Riccardi, Howdy Mr X (Nico Jr).

All the posts above with all the claims of how unlikely Presti would be, and how hard, and how OKC wants to keep him, and on and on, I get that. Already all baked into my thinking. But it doesn't change the situation's bottom line in pursuing a top-tier GM who is a proven expert, which is that there's only one or two things that really can't be overcome: if the guy they want has no interest AT ANY PRICE in making the move, or if he's under contract and the team isn't willing to let him make a change (for compensation, at any price). As long as there's a price, there's a path.

AND HERE'S WHY I AM INSISTENT ON PRESTI - if they are going to have to go through all of that to get anyone on the top tier, why not go ahead and just target THE BEST? You'll have to do all that hard work anyhow, right? Why settle for less?

Presti, please.

[cow]

I'm setting myself up for disappointment, but I'm in the Presti or bust camp. I could talk myself into Jesse Gould though kind of like what the Cowboy are doing with CP (I know, I know, executives are different from coaches).

[Winter]

I'm setting myself up for disappointment, but I'm in the Presti or bust camp.  I could talk myself into Jesse Gould though kind of like what the Cowboy are doing with CP (I know, I know, executives are different from coaches).

And what exactly does a "bust" look like?

[cow]

And what exactly does a "bust" look like?

The field.

[DanSchwartzgan]

Great video ^ to explain the dynamics at play in getting a GM. Whoever has not watched it, should watch it.



All the posts above with all the claims of how unlikely Presti would be, and how hard, and how OKC wants to keep him, and on and on, I get that. Already all baked into my thinking. But it doesn't change the situation's bottom line in pursuing a top-tier GM who is a proven expert, which is that there's only one or two things that really can't be overcome: if the guy they want has no interest AT ANY PRICE in making the move, or if he's under contract and the team isn't willing to let him make a change (for compensation, at any price). As long as there's a price, there's a path.

Stein also points out the thing that I’ve long thought gives you some plausible chance of being right…Dumond’s history on the one hire he’s made to date.  I still don’t think Presti happens, but if it does, it will be because Dumond money-whipped him into submission.  

I’ve never been against Presti.  I’ll be quite happy if it comes to pass.  Holding out for him will come at some price and I’d rather we try to employ the next Presti versus some retread (thought I was a fan of some of the deal constructs that happened while Lindsay was here).  

I think we might have someone who will likely be a successful GM in the not too distant future already on the staff.  So, I don’t really enjoy this new habit of yours trying to disparage the people who were in the organization when Nico went rogue.  None of us really KNOW who knew what or who did what, but I’ve seen nothing that indicates anything beyond the single shooter theory being the accurate one.  This week Finley flat out denied any advanced knowledge.  These aren’t easy jobs to come by and once the deal was done, there was no point in publicly disparaging the deal while Nico was still the boss.

[cow]

None of us really KNOW who knew what or who did what

While I appreciate your sentiment that someone currently in our organization could be a successful GM, the bolded is why I think the best move is to look at someone with no connections to the Mavs.  While I'm inclined to agree that Nico went rogue just for the fact that you'd be hard pressed to find many people who would have made that trade, especially for the woeful compensation, there will always be a shadow of doubt for who was or wasn't involved and almost assuredly never know the truth. I still believe there is a ton of trust to be rebuilt with the fanbase and after decades of not-so-great front office work, it would be hard to get excited about someone that was in the front office when the Luka trade happen ed(the twenty ton straw that broke the camel's back).    Shooting for the moon also makes a ton of sense as after this draft, there isn't much to look forward to with the current state of our assets.  We can argue how much better this team will be if healthy, but I don't think anyone in their hearts believe we'll field a true contender.  We are heading into the dreaded middle ground of roster composition, not good enough to truly compete and no pick ownership should we be bad (highly possible due to injury concerns) to benefit from being a bottom feeder.  I'd argue we need a step or two above a successful GM, someone who is truly great that can sell a long term vision and shrewd enough to make moves to accomplish that vision while hamstrung by the previous administration.

[RasheedsBigWhiteSpot]

I've been mulling how to get a pick in the late Lottery to get Burries. So...

Mavs get Jimmy Butler, Joan Beringer and GS' #1 (currently #11) and Wolves'#28

Warriors get Rudy Gobert, Klay #30
Wolves get Kyrie

This would be agreed to pre-Draft but finalized in the new year so that the Mavs still skirt the Apron. The Mavs would get another pick and Butler's expiring deal would be nice at the deadline. Or, if the Mavs are making a playoff push, Butler would be a good vet next to Cooper.
The Warriors still need a center and Gobert lines up with Steph's timeline. And Kyrie has been rumored to be a player the Wolves and Ant likes.
*Don't get hung up on capo'nomics