2026 NBA draft thread

[Smitty]

The defense is a legit concern, but on the other hand I think he is top 3 in this draft for chances to be an elite creator.  That is so difficult to find that I think its worth it.  Its a lot easier to find 3&D players than elite creators.

That's why I still like the upside of Brown Jr., and why I like him more than Wagler, if that's who it comes down to at 7/8.

This just popped up on X also and thought I'd share here since we're talking about these guys a lot.


@mcfNBA
Isolation points-per-possession (PPP) and turnover efficiency data from 2026 NBA Draft lead guard prospects (FRP projected).

Anything that stands out to you?



Add that with Brown's 31% usage and 30% AST percentage, with his volume 3PT shooting and it's difficult to ignore. Something this team really needs. Something every NBA team needs.

[F Gump]

My updated Mavs big board, which likely bears no resemblance to any national/expert big board:
1) Dybantsa
2) Wilson
3) Acuff
4) Flemings
5) Boozer
6) (Peterson)
7) Burries
8) Wagler
9) Lendeborg
10) Philon
11) (Brown)

Parentheses - I don't want the Mavs to obtain these players in any event, but Peterson, at least, should be a placeholder to push others down if the Mavs don't move up to top four. I think the ship has sailed on Peterson being drafted top 4 - we'll see if I'm right.

I'm not sure I would pick them in the same order as you, but I am with you on ...
1 Peterson and Brown (and I have Wagler also) as players that I wouldn't end up drafting. I think other teams will want them more (and thus pick them earlier) than I would rank them, and
2 Wilson. IMO your rating of Wilson is justified (I am thinking that in 5 years he is likely to be the best player in this draft)
3 Burries solidly in the top 10. Maybe. I saw AZ earlier in the year where I was focused on a different player (maybe it was Peterson or Dybantsa) and kept hearing Burries mentioned, but didn't really pay attention. But I watched him again last night and I came away quite impressed. One issue is that I compare him to the PGs, while I'm guessing he is being assessed as an undersized 2-guard rather than as a PG, and if he's not a PG then I can see why he might be not as desirable.

[vfromlmf]

I think every single one of these guys have flaws. They aren't finished products. Same as prospect Flagg last year. I think what the Mavs need is top end talent. Fit comes later. When these young guys start to become who they're going to be in the NBA, and when they're ready to compete at the highest level. IF/when that comes to fruition, maybe you need to trade a talent like Wilson/Boozer for a player that "fits" Flagg's game more at that time. Right now, fit is the last thing on my mind when drafting in the top 10 for the last time in 5+ years. Get the best player (whoever you think that is)!

Excellent point which is why I'm so excited about this draft. I can rationalize just about any one of the guys in our range as a long term franchise changing piece. Say the Mavs somehow fall to 9 and end up with Mikel Brown Jr. That's the number one freshman guard prospect entering the season and he looked the part when he was briefly healthy. 

I understand there will be some misses and many of these guys won't come close to their high-end comps but a lot of the fun of watching a bad team is in projecting your young players. Even if it's not always truely rational.

A great example is Burries. He's a guy I wasn't high on two weeks ago but now he's solidly in the top-9 for me -- and no less than Stan Van Gundy thinks he's the next Devin Booker. He'd be an awesome complimentary piece next to Flagg.

[Smitty]

Excellent point which is why I'm so excited about this draft. I can rationalize just about any one of the guys in our range as a long term franchise changing piece. Say the Mavs somehow fall to 9 and end up with Mikel Brown Jr. That's the number one freshman guard prospect entering the season and he looked the part when he was briefly healthy. 

I understand there will be some misses and many of these guys won't come close to their high-end comps but a lot of the fun of watching a bad team is in projecting your young players. Even if it's not always truely rational.

A great example is Burries. He's a guy I wasn't high on two weeks ago but now he's solidly in the top-9 for me -- and no less than Stan Van Gundy thinks he's the next Devin Booker. He'd be an awesome complimentary piece next to Flagg.

I like Burries also. He's not a PG. Neither is Peterson or Wagler. Which is perfectly fine. I'm not in the camp that the Mavs must draft a PG with their top pick. Like I said earlier, I'd be okay with Brown, Wagler, Burries, Philon if that's where they go at 7/8.

[F Gump]

One other area where I differ a little from you guys is my trepidation with Wilson.  I have concerns about a perimeter player who can't shoot in general, and I know I'm not supposed to worry about fit, but a power forward that can't shoot is not what I am looking to put next to Flagg.

Wilson can shoot, he's just not (yet) shooting 3s. He's really good in mid-range. From what I've seen, I think he's Karl Malone. There is no scenario in which I turn up my nose at that. I think he is being overlooked here due to lack of exposure (we haven't seen him as much on the national stage, so we aren't being wowed by what he can do).

My criteria re who is needed next to Flagg? I want "the very best player they can get. I believe any two players who are good enough can fit on the floor, regardless, and maybe even 3. I also expect Flagg's game (including his shooting) will grow considerably which will over time make any attempts to micro-manage a fit become moot. He will be able to fit with ANYONE who can play well.

[mvossman]

That's why I still like the upside of Brown Jr., and why I like him more than Wagler, if that's who it comes down to at 7/8.

This just popped up on X also and thought I'd share here since we're talking about these guys a lot.


@mcfNBA
Isolation points-per-possession (PPP) and turnover efficiency data from 2026 NBA Draft lead guard prospects (FRP projected).

Anything that stands out to you?



Add that with Brown's 31% usage and 30% AST percentage, with his volume 3PT shooting and it's difficult to ignore. Something this team really needs. Something every NBA team needs.

Yeah its a risk vs reward analysis with the biggest reward being elite creation.  Brown's upside means you can make an argument for him over any of those second tier guys (except for Acuff).

On the other hand, there are some upside considerations for some of the other guys.  Flemings and Burries are in situations that are muting their production.  Wagler is a late bloomer.  Late bloomers tend to develop/improve more at the next level.

I would suggest that the argument for Brown ahead of those guys (upside creation potential despite red flags) could be made to put Peterson ahead of Wison on a draft board.

[Winter]

The podcast I saw on Wilson had both analysts saying his mid-range shot was good, and they didn't think there was any reason he would have problems eventually shooting from long range. I mean he hardly shoots any 3-pointers and still averages almost 20 ppg. He is arguably the best defender in the top of the draft along with Boozer. His first step is awesome. He blocks shots from behind and the side much like Flagg. He's also one of the best rebounders in the top of the draft. I just can't see any team passing on this guy. He'll go in the top four for sure.

I think I need to see Flemings play in these next games. And even though I'm high on Burries, this tournament may help define him as well.

[mvossman]

Wilson can shoot, he's just not (yet) shooting 3s. He's really good in mid-range. From what I've seen, I think he's Karl Malone. There is no scenario in which I turn up my nose at that. I think he is being overlooked here due to lack of exposure (we haven't seen him as much on the national stage, so we aren't being wowed by what he can do).

My criteria re who is needed next to Flagg? I want "the very best player they can get. I believe any two players who are good enough can fit on the floor, regardless, and maybe even 3. I also expect Flagg's game (including his shooting) will grow considerably which will over time make any attempts to micro-manage a fit become moot. He will be able to fit with ANYONE who can play well.

Actually his midrange numbers are not particularly good.  He does most of his damage at the rim (and in the post).  I recognize that his sample was particularly small due to injury and that players continue to develop, but just going off his college results he is not a floor spacer.

[mvossman]

The podcast I saw on Wilson had both analysts saying his mid-range shot was good, and they didn't think there was any reason he would have problems eventually shooting from long range. I mean he hardly shoots any 3-pointers and still averages almost 20 ppg. He is arguably the best defender in the top of the draft along with Boozer. His first step is awesome. He blocks shots from behind and the side much like Flagg. He's also one of the best rebounders in the top of the draft. I just can't see any team passing on this guy. He'll go in the top four for sure.

I think I need to see Flemings play in these next games. And even though I'm high on Burries, this tournament may help define him as well.

I think he will be a significantly better defender than Boozer.  His elite defensive potential is why he is in the top 4.

[michaeltex]

That's why I still like the upside of Brown Jr., and why I like him more than Wagler, if that's who it comes down to at 7/8.

This just popped up on X also and thought I'd share here since we're talking about these guys a lot.


@mcfNBA
Isolation points-per-possession (PPP) and turnover efficiency data from 2026 NBA Draft lead guard prospects (FRP projected).

Anything that stands out to you?



Add that with Brown's 31% usage and 30% AST percentage, with his volume 3PT shooting and it's difficult to ignore. Something this team really needs. Something every NBA team needs.

Based on this data set, why am I not hearing Stirtz in any of these discussions? 19.7/2.7/4.5 with 1.5 steals on 48/36/84 shooting percentages. Not as flashy as some of the top 5 and a little older, but looks to be a solid player. Is it an age thing (22)? Maybe this is his ceiling instead of his floor?

[KillerLeft]

I'm so frustrated that my busy season always coincides with the end of these Mavs seasons. It's usually tough to keep up with the team, and this year I'm not even that motivated to try, for obvious reasons. But, this year I wish I was able to watch these college guys more, whereas usually I don't care.

Can you guys tell me what's wrong with Flemmings? From the little I've seen he seems like just what the doctor ordered.

[mvossman]

I'm so frustrated that my busy season always coincides with the end of these Mavs seasons. It's usually tough to keep up with the team, and this year I'm not even that motivated to try, for obvious reasons. But, this year I wish I was able to watch these college guys more, whereas usually I don't care.

Can you guys tell me what's wrong with Flemmings? From the little I've seen he seems like just what the doctor ordered.

If there is a nitpick with him, it would be his low 3 point volume.  He takes just under 3 a game.  

But the biggest reason you probably don't hear much about him is that he has been project to go 5 for a long time and Mavs have no chance to pick there.  It may be that Acuff goes ahead of him, but there is little chance the Mavs pick at 6 either.  Honestly Those are probably the two least likely guys for Mavs to pick simply given where they are likely to go.

[mvossman]

Based on this data set, why am I not hearing Stirtz in any of these discussions? 19.7/2.7/4.5 with 1.5 steals on 48/36/84 shooting percentages. Not as flashy as some of the top 5 and a little older, but looks to be a solid player. Is it an age thing (22)? Maybe this is his ceiling instead of his floor?

He is a senior and three years older than most of the guys we are talking about.  That tends to be high floor low ceiling guys.  Just look at Philon who has great numbers but is being discounted because he is a sophomore.

[mvossman]

Delete

[michaeltex]

He is a senior and three years older than most of the guys we are talking about.  That tends to be high floor low ceiling guys.  Just look at Philon who has great numbers but is being discounted because he is a sophomore.

Thanks. That's kind of what I thought. 

But someone like this may be a late 1st or 2nd round pick?

[mvossman]

Thanks. That's kind of what I thought. 

But someone like this may be a late 1st or 2nd round pick?

He is good enough that he might sneak into late lottery, but not where we should be picking.

[Smitty]

[KillerLeft]

If there is a nitpick with him, it would be his low 3 point volume.  He takes just under 3 a game.  

But the biggest reason you probably don't hear much about him is that he has been project to go 5 for a long time and Mavs have no chance to pick there.  It may be that Acuff goes ahead of him, but there is little chance the Mavs pick at 6 either.  Honestly Those are probably the two least likely guys for Mavs to pick simply given where they are likely to go.

Thanks. Personally, in my (admittedly currently ignorant) opinion, he might be my #2 Mavs target, right after Dybansta. 

After watching some of the former pro players speak (recklessly, kind of) about Peterson's health concerns, I'm not nearly as scared of him as I used to be, so he'd still be much higher on my list than he seems to be around here, too. 

I like Acuff, but not as much as those others. 

You're telling me that NONE of them is a realistic possibility?

[Smitty]

If there is a nitpick with him, it would be his low 3 point volume.  He takes just under 3 a game.  

But the biggest reason you probably don't hear much about him is that he has been project to go 5 for a long time and Mavs have no chance to pick there.  It may be that Acuff goes ahead of him, but there is little chance the Mavs pick at 6 either.  Honestly Those are probably the two least likely guys for Mavs to pick simply given where they are likely to go.

Spot on. I think there's a case that if the Mavs land at 4, they could talk themselves into Acuff or Flemings though. When I did my "feelings" about each potential prospect, I wasn't talking about where they were drafted, just that they were Mavericks. AJ-Boozer-Wilson-Acuff were my top 4, so who knows... Not that I see Peterson dropping to 5, just how I feel about it all as it stands today. It's much more likely it'd come down to Wilson or one of those two PG's at 4 for the Mavs.

[mvossman]

Thanks. Personally, in my (admittedly currently ignorant) opinion, he might be my #2 Mavs target, right after Dybansta. 

After watching some of the former pro players speak (recklessly, kind of) about Peterson's health concerns, I'm not nearly as scared of him as I used to be, so he'd still be much higher on my list than he seems to be around here, too. 

I like Acuff, but not as much as those others. 

You're telling me that NONE of them is a realistic possibility?

Mavs most likely spot to pick (roughly 50%) is 7 or 8.  Most likely the draft will go something like:

Dybansta
Boozer
Peterson
Wilson
Acuff
Flemings

That means Mavs will be picking from a group including some of Wagler, Brown, Burries, Philon

The next most likely spot is top 4 (roughly mid 30s percent).  Most folks on the board (and most folks in NBA circles) feel that you should target top talent over things like fit.  That means Mavs would likely grab one of those first 4 guys in the list.

Anything else will be an outlier.  If Mavs managed to finish 6th worst (I have no illusions they can make 5th) then they have a 9 percent change of getting 6th pick (at 7 they have zero chance) and if they finish 7th they have a 14% chance of finishing worse than 8th.