2026 NBA Extended Mock Draft: 7.0By: Aran_Smith

1. Washington Wizards – AJ Dybantsa

6’9”, 215, SF/PF, BYU, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 35 GP, 25.5 PPG, 51.0 FG%, 33.1 3P%, 77.4 FT%, 6.8 RPG, 3.7 APG, 1.1 SPG, 0.3 BPG, 3.1 TO

Dybantsa was one of the most consistent and dominant players in college basketball this season, combining elite physical tools with a steadily expanding offensive skill set. A fluid, explosive athlete, he led the nation in scoring and carried a primary offensive role with strong efficiency. His length, anticipation, and motor translated defensively, where he rotated with purpose, disrupted passing lanes, and held his own across multiple positions. Offensively, he operated as a true point forward, handling comfortably, initiating sets, and creating opportunities for teammates with improving vision and composure.

He retook the top spot on the board following a dominant close to the season, highlighted by a 35-point performance in the opening round of the NCAA Tournament, even in a loss. The game reflected the steady progress he made throughout the year, particularly with his shot creation and overall polish. While his perimeter shooting was inconsistent early, his efficiency climbed, and he developed a highly reliable mid-range package featuring turnaround jumpers, pull-ups, and dribble counters to create separation. He shot 1.4–4.2 from three (33.1%), and while the volume and accuracy still had room for improvement, they were not far off and trending in the right direction. He attacked downhill with power and balance, finished above the rim, rebounded his position, and seamlessly shifted between scoring and facilitating roles. While Darryn Peterson may offer slightly more pure upside, Dybantsa was clearly the more dominant and durable player this season, making him a strong favorite to be selected first overall.

Why the Wizards select AJ Dybantsa: With the lottery complete and Washington officially on the clock at No. 1, all signs currently point toward the Wizards selecting Dybantsa as the centerpiece of the franchise moving forward. While Darryn Peterson could receive legitimate consideration and may arguably fit the roster’s long-term positional needs slightly better, Dybantsa appears to be the safer overall selection given his combination of elite physical tools, versatility, production, and lack of medical concerns. At the top of the draft, teams prioritize star power and long-term upside above all else, and Dybantsa offers both in abundance. His ability to impact the game as a scorer, playmaker, defender, and transition weapon gives Washington a bona fide franchise cornerstone capable of anchoring every aspect of the rebuild. For a fan base searching for a true face of the franchise, landing Dybantsa would represent a massive turning point and inject renewed excitement and optimism into the organization’s future.

NBA Comparison: Tracy McGrady

2. Utah Jazz – Darryn Peterson

6’5”, 200, PG/SG, Kansas, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 24 GP, 20.2 PPG, 43.8 FG%, 38.2 3P%, 82.6 FT%, 4.2 RPG, 1.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 1.6 TO

Peterson is a supremely talented scoring guard whose blend of burst, strength, and shot-making gives him arguably the highest upside in the class. He features a quick first step, deep pull-up range, and the ability to score at all three levels, consistently putting pressure on defenses both on and off the ball. His positional size and power are further enhanced by an extraordinary 8’7” standing reach, giving him rare physical advantages for a combo guard and legitimate two-way versatility. His three-point shooting stood out as a major strength, knocking down 2.6–6.9 per game (38.2%), showcasing both high volume and advanced shot-making ability from deep.

His season, however, was uneven. Kansas failed to make a deep tournament run, and Peterson finished the year on a relatively quiet note compared to expectations. Limited by a mysterious cramping issue that impacted his availability and rhythm, he was often managed throughout the season and never fully looked like himself for extended stretches. While he began to play more complete games toward the end of the year, the consistency and dominance that defined his historically great high school career only showed up in flashes.

Why the Jazz select Darryn Peterson: Holding the No. 2 pick, Utah still lacks a true franchise-level perimeter talent to build around, making Peterson an especially appealing fit. He gives the Jazz the type of explosive shot creator and offensive centerpiece the roster currently needs, with a rare blend of size, athleticism, scoring versatility, and playmaking upside. Peterson has the tools to become the face of the franchise and, if the medical concerns and cramping issues are firmly behind him, possesses the talent ceiling to emerge as one of the premier players in the class. There could also be some internal intrigue surrounding Caleb Wilson, whose versatility, defensive upside, and long-term fit would give Utah an extremely dynamic and switchable frontcourt foundation. Cameron Boozer likewise remains a very strong option. However, after acquiring Jaren Jackson Jr., selecting another frontcourt centerpiece becomes somewhat less seamless from a roster construction standpoint, potentially pushing Utah toward prioritizing the elite perimeter upside Peterson brings to the table.

NBA Comparison: Devin Booker

3. Memphis Grizzlies – Cameron Boozer

6’9”, 255, PF, Duke, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 38 GP, 22.5 PPG, 55.6 FG%, 39.1 3P%, 78.9 FT%, 10.2 RPG, 4.1 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 2.5 TO

Boozer was one of the steadiest and most dominant players in college basketball this season, combining strength, touch, motor, and elite fundamentals in a way that consistently translated to winning. A physically ready freshman, he averaged 22.5 points and 10.2 rebounds per game while operating as a face-up scorer, interior finisher, and offensive hub. He led Duke on a deep run, bringing them within a close loss to UConn of a Final Four appearance, falling just a step short of Cooper Flagg, and earned National Player of the Year honors. While much of his scoring came through physicality and bully-ball finishes around the rim, his feel, footwork, and ability to exploit mismatches consistently stood out.

Though not an explosive athlete, Boozer’s skill level and adaptability separated him. He showed advanced passing ability and knocked down 1.4–3.6 threes per game (39.1%), signaling real perimeter growth and long-term offensive versatility beyond the paint. Defensively, he was sturdy and disciplined, relying on positioning and toughness, while his rebounding made him a constant double-double threat. His combination of shooting, passing, and rebounding is rare, and while some question how his physical style will translate over an 82-game NBA season, his IQ, production, and consistency make him one of the safest and most unique prospects in the class.

Why the Grizzlies select Cameron Boozer: Following the trade that sent Jaren Jackson Jr. to Utah, Boozer emerges as an especially clean positional and stylistic fit for Memphis moving forward. One of the league’s more analytics-driven organizations, the Grizzlies are likely to value Boozer’s efficiency, feel for the game, passing ability, and overall impact across multiple areas. Widely viewed as one of the safest prospects in the class, he brings advanced instincts, interior scoring, elite ball movement for a big, and a highly reliable approach that aligns closely with the type of players Memphis has historically prioritized. His rebounding, toughness, and consistency would give the Grizzlies an immediate contributor capable of fitting seamlessly alongside Ja Morant while helping stabilize the frontcourt long term. With All-Star upside and one of the strongest all-around profiles in the draft, Boozer offers both immediate value and long-term franchise building potential for Memphis.

NBA Comparison: Al Horford

4. Chicago Bulls – Caleb Wilson

6’10”, 215, PF, North Carolina, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 24 GP, 19.8 PPG, 57.8 FG%, 25.9 3P%, 71.3 FT%, 9.4 RPG, 2.7 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 2.0 TO

Wilson was one of the most productive and impactful freshmen in the country, combining efficiency, athleticism, and motor to consistently influence games on both ends. A fluid, bouncy forward with excellent size and mobility, he thrived as a rim runner, transition weapon, and face-up scorer. He finished above the rim with ease, attacked closeouts effectively, and created mismatches with his speed and activity level. His season was cut short after missing the final month and a half with two broken thumbs, but his body of work firmly established him as a top-five talent.

While his three-point shooting remains a work in progress, the touch and mechanics suggest room for long-term growth. His lack of high-level passing production is a mild concern in more analytics-driven evaluations, but his overall two-way versatility and physical tools stand out. Compared to Cameron Boozer, Wilson held a clear edge in speed and athleticism, particularly in transition, and in a different era may have been prioritized higher. However, in today’s skill-heavy NBA, Boozer’s polish gives him a slight edge, even as Wilson’s dynamic athletic profile and upside remain extremely appealing.

Why the Bulls select Caleb Wilson: Selecting fourth overall, the Bulls swing on one of the highest-upside players in the class in Wilson, whose combination of size, athleticism, defensive versatility, and long-term potential gives Chicago a possible franchise cornerstone moving forward. The emergence of Matas Buzelis and his growing ability to slide to the three creates additional flexibility in the frontcourt, making a pairing with Wilson far more realistic long term. Widely viewed as one of the most talented players on the board, Wilson brings elite physical tools, transition ability, defensive upside, and the potential to impact the game on both ends at a high level. While he still needs to improve as a shooter and passer, the raw talent and ceiling are difficult to overlook. For a Bulls team searching for star-level talent and a clearer long-term direction, Wilson offers the type of upside worth investing in at No. 4.

NBA Comparison: Jermaine O’Neal / Chris Bosh

5. Los Angeles Clippers – Darius Acuff

6’3”, 190, PG, Arkansas, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 36 GP, 23.5 PPG, 48.4 FG%, 44.0 3P%, 80.9 FT%, 3.1 RPG, 6.4 APG, 0.8 SPG, 0.3 BPG, 2.2 TO

Acuff emerged as one of the most productive and dynamic lead guards in college basketball, taking a major leap and establishing himself as a true offensive engine. He averaged 23.5 points and 6.4 assists while shooting an elite 44.0% from three on high volume (2.5–5.8), showcasing both efficiency and shot-making versatility. A strong, physical guard with excellent pace control, he consistently got downhill, used his tight handle to create separation, and played with the confidence of a true floor leader. His ability to generate offense at all three levels, combined with his command and late-game shot creation, made him one of the most dangerous guards in the country. He also emerged as one of the major winners of the pre-draft measurement process, checking in at 6’2” barefoot with a strong 6’7” wingspan and an 8’2.5” standing reach, helping ease some of the physical concerns tied to his size.

He really came into his own as a dominant college player, often looking stronger and more impactful than higher-ranked guards, including Darryn Peterson, despite giving up size. While undersized by NBA standards and likely to lean offense-first, his upside as a playmaker and shot creator is highly intriguing. Guards his size must be special to overcome physical limitations in today’s game, and Acuff fits that mold, blending elite shooting with creative ball handling, including some of that filthy Tim Hardaway “UTEP two-step” ability to shake defenders and get into the paint. His combination of production, efficiency, improved physical measurements, and offensive creativity makes him one of the biggest risers in the class.

Why the Clippers select Darius Acuff: At No. 5, the Clippers opt for value and upside, selecting Acuff as arguably the best talent still available on the board despite already having Darius Garland in place. Acuff strengthened his standing further during the pre-draft process by measuring well at the combine, helping ease some concerns about his physical profile and reinforcing the upside tied to his scoring and shot-creation ability. A dynamic offensive guard with advanced creativity and confidence with the ball, he gives the Clippers another long-term building block capable of generating offense late in possessions and carrying stretches as a primary creator. While there may be some overlap stylistically with Garland, talent often outweighs fit this high in the draft, and Los Angeles could ultimately view Acuff as too good a value to pass up. His scoring instincts, offensive polish, and long-term upside give the Clippers another potential centerpiece as they continue balancing the present with the future.

NBA Comparison: Tim Hardaway

6. Brooklyn Nets – Keaton Wagler

6’6”, 185, PG/SG, Illinois, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 37 GP, 17.9 PPG, 44.5 FG%, 39.7 3P%, 79.6 FT%, 5.1 RPG, 4.2 APG, 0.9 SPG, 0.4 BPG, 1.8 TO

7. Sacramento Kings – Kingston Flemings

6’4”, 185, PG, Houston, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 37 GP, 16.1 PPG, 47.6 FG%, 38.7 3P%, 84.5 FT%, 4.1 RPG, 5.2 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.3 BPG, 1.8 TO

Flemings emerged as one of the most impactful freshman lead guards in the country, pairing elite athleticism with improving efficiency and growing command of Houston’s offense. An explosive downhill creator with a tight handle and excellent burst, he consistently generated penetration and finished above the rim with strength and creativity. He showed real progress as a perimeter shooter, converting 1.1–2.9 threes per game (38.7%), though the relatively modest volume still leaves some questions about how consistently defenses will need to respect him at the next level. He played with confidence and edge as Houston’s primary initiator, showing comfort pulling up, collapsing defenses, and making timely reads out of ball screens, while posting a strong 5.2-to-1.8 assist-to-turnover ratio that reflects his control and decision-making.

Flemings arguably has the highest ceiling among the point guards in this class due to his athleticism, burst, and overall offensive package. However, he is not quite the same level of sure thing as some of the guards ahead of him, as his jumper and overall polish still have room to develop. That may lead to a slightly longer developmental curve at the NBA level, even as the upside remains extremely enticing. His competitiveness, toughness, and presence off the floor are major positives, and with continued refinement, he has the tools to grow into a dynamic lead guard capable of impacting the game on both ends.

NBA Comparison: De’Aaron Fox

8. Atlanta Hawks (from New Orleans) – Mikel Brown

6’4”, 190, PG, Louisville, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 21 GP, 18.2 PPG, 41.0 FG%, 34.4 3P%, 84.4 FT%, 3.3 RPG, 4.7 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.1 BPG, 3.1 TO

Brown remained one of the most skilled and intriguing lead guards in the 2026 class, controlling tempo with poise and playing with a quiet confidence that showed in his decision-making. More quick and shifty than outright fast, he excelled at creating separation with change of pace, hesitation moves, and tight ball handling. He generated offense efficiently out of ball screens, where his pull-up shooting and shot creativity stood out, highlighted by a 45-point performance against NC State in which he knocked down 10-of-16 from three. Despite shooting 2.6–7.6 from three (34.4%), the numbers fell short of his true ability, as he remains arguably the best pure outside shooter in the class based on shot difficulty, mechanics, and overall touch.

Durability remains the defining variable in his evaluation, with back issues dating back three years that were heavily scrutinized and led to significant missed time, including the NCAA Tournament. He never fully established consistent availability, making it difficult to project sustained impact over a full season. Even so, his upside is as high as any guard in the class, with a ceiling that could surpass Darius Acuff, Keaton Wagler, and Kingston Flemings if healthy. At some point, the risk becomes worth the gamble, similar to a Michael Porter Jr. scenario, as Brown has the talent, size, and scoring ability to far exceed his draft slot and potentially emerge as one of the biggest steals in this range.

Why the Hawks select Mikel Brown: At No. 9, the gamble to select Brown despite the back injury concerns makes sense for an Atlanta team entering a new phase following the departure of Trae Young and lacking a clear long-term answer at point guard. A dynamic, shifty lead guard with advanced shot creation and playmaking ability, Brown can generate offense at all three levels while operating both on and off the ball. His scoring instincts, pace, and creativity give the Hawks a potential offensive centerpiece to help stabilize the backcourt moving forward. While Nate Ament would likely receive consideration in this range, his skill set overlaps somewhat with Jalen Johnson’s as a bigger, versatile forward, making Brown the cleaner roster fit. If healthy, Brown has the talent to significantly outperform his draft slot and emerge as a foundational piece for Atlanta’s next era.

NBA Comparison: CJ McCollum / Darius Garland

9. Dallas Mavericks – Nate Ament

6’11”, 205, SF/PF, Tennessee, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 35 GP, 16.7 PPG, 39.9 FG%, 33.3 3P%, 79.0 FT%, 6.3 RPG, 2.3 APG, 1.0 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 2.3 TO

Ament has cemented himself as one of the more intriguing long-term prospects in the freshman class, combining size, mobility, and perimeter skill at 6’10”. A smooth, fluid forward, he fit the modern NBA mold as a big wing capable of spacing the floor and attacking closeouts. His production grew as his role expanded, and he showed the ability to score at multiple levels while contributing on the glass and flashing connective passing ability. He also displayed surprising toughness throughout the season, getting to the free throw line at a high rate (5.6–7.1, 79.0%), helping dispel early concerns about physicality and willingness to embrace contact.

The next step in his development is adding strength, consistency, and greater offensive assertiveness. His three-point shooting (1.3–3.9, 33.3%) was somewhat underwhelming, but the mechanics and touch suggest it can become a real strength over time. He can still be knocked off spots by stronger defenders and will need to continue improving his ability to create separation in the half court. Defensively, he showed encouraging versatility with his length and mobility, even as his technique continues to develop. With added strength and continued growth, Ament projects as a high-upside stretch forward with significant long-term two-way potential.

Why the Mavericks select Nate Ament: At No. 9, Dallas adds another high-upside piece to place alongside Cooper Flagg, selecting Ament as a versatile forward with significant long-term potential. His combination of size, fluid athleticism, defensive versatility, and developing offensive skill set gives the Mavericks an intriguing complementary talent capable of fitting into a variety of lineup constructions. Ament’s ability to impact the game without dominating the ball makes him a particularly clean fit next to Flagg, while still offering substantial upside as his frame and perimeter game continue to develop. If available, Mikel Brown would also be a legitimate possibility here given Dallas’ long-term need for more creation and guard depth, especially if his medical evaluations check out positively. Still, Ament’s two-way versatility and long-term ceiling make him an appealing foundational addition for a Mavericks team continuing to build toward sustained success.

NBA Comparison: Lamar Odom / Jonathan Isaac

10. Milwaukee Bucks – Hannes Steinbach

6’10”, 240, PF, Washington  Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 30 GP, 18.5 PPG, 57.7 FG%, 34.0 3P%, 75.9 FT%, 11.8 RPG, 1.6 APG, 1.1 SPG, 1.2 BPG, 2.0 TO

Steinbach established himself as one of the most productive and physically imposing freshman bigs in the country, posting monster point and rebound numbers while significantly elevating a Washington team that finished 16–17. At 6’10”, 240 pounds, he played with a mature interior presence, controlling the glass and producing double-doubles with regularity. He ran the floor well, carved out deep position, and finished through contact with touch and patience, consistently leveraging his size and strength to impact games.

Offensively, Steinbach showed some intrigue as a floor spacer, knocking down 0.6–1.8 threes per game (34.0%), though the volume remains low and his game is still primarily built around interior scoring and rebounding. He also flashed solid feel as a passer in short-roll situations. Defensively, he relied more on positioning and strength than elite athleticism, with mobility in space an area to monitor. Still, his combination of size, rebounding dominance, and emerging skill makes him a dependable frontcourt prospect with clear NBA rotation value.

Why the Bucks select Hannes Steinbach: At No. 10, Milwaukee leans into size, versatility, and long-term upside with Steinbach, adding a modern frontcourt piece who fits the evolving direction of the roster. A fluid, skilled big with the ability to handle, pass, and stretch the floor, Steinbach brings a unique offensive dimension with his face-up game and perimeter touch. He shows comfort operating in space, making reads as a passer, and attacking slower defenders off the dribble, giving him intriguing offensive versatility for his size. Defensively, his length and mobility offer potential to switch and provide weakside rim protection, though he is still developing consistency on that end. Pairing him with Milwaukee’s core gives the Bucks a high-upside frontcourt talent who can grow into a versatile two-way contributor. If his strength and defensive awareness continue to improve, Steinbach has the tools to emerge as a modern, multi-skilled big capable of impacting the game in a variety of ways.

NBA Comparison: Alperin Sengun / Domantas Sabonis

11. Golden State Warriors – Yaxel Lendeborg

6’10”, 240, PF/C, Michigan, Sr.
2025–26 Stats: 40 GP, 15.1 PPG, 51.5 FG%, 37.2 3P%, 82.4 FT%, 6.8 RPG, 3.2 APG, 1.1 SPG, 1.2 BPG, 1.1 TO

Lendeborg remained one of the more unique and versatile senior bigs in the class, offering an uncommon blend of size, passing, and overall feel. In his first season at Michigan, he played a key role in guiding the team to a National Championship, elevating his draft stock into the lottery conversation. While his scoring production dipped compared to his UAB days, his all-around impact and connective skill set stood out, as he operated comfortably from the elbows and short roll, facilitating offense and keeping the ball moving. His improved three-point shooting was a major development, converting 1.7–4.5 per game (37.2%), giving him legitimate floor-spacing value to pair with his high-IQ playmaking.

There are still some mixed elements in his evaluation. His free throw rate was somewhat underwhelming, though that was partly a reflection of role and usage, and teams will want to see more consistent offensive assertiveness and defensive reliability against NBA-level athletes. At 24, his age limits long-term upside, but his maturity, versatility, and winning impact make him an appealing option for teams seeking immediate contribution. With an outgoing personality and an unorthodox path to this level, Lendeborg continues to add new dimensions to his game, showing clear coachability and work ethic, and projects as a versatile rotation big who can facilitate, space the floor, and contribute across multiple areas.

Why the Warriors select Yaxel Lendeborg: Golden State could prioritize a player who better fits its current timeline if it elects to keep the pick, making Lendeborg a very realistic option despite him potentially being viewed as a slight reach in this range. With Steve Kerr returning and the organization still focused on competing around its veteran core, adding a mature, ready-to-contribute player may take precedence over a longer-term developmental swing. Lendeborg’s versatility, feel, passing ability, and impact without needing high usage fit naturally within the Warriors’ offensive system, giving them a connective frontcourt piece capable of helping winning basketball immediately. Helping capture a national championship at Michigan, he brings maturity, toughness, and reliability, along with improved three-point shooting and strong decision-making. Players like Brayden Burries or Labaron Philon could receive consideration if Golden State chooses to focus more heavily on the future, but a polished 24-year-old contributor like Lendeborg aligns more closely with the win-now approach the franchise may continue to prioritize.

NBA Comparison: OG Anunoby 

12. Oklahoma City Thunder (from LA Clippers) – Brayden Burries

6’4”, 185, PG/SG, Arizona, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 39 GP, 16.1 PPG, 49.1 FG%, 39.1 3P%, 80.5 FT%, 4.9 RPG, 2.4 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 1.5 TO

Burries established himself as one of the most productive and efficient freshman guards in the country, leading a No. 1 seed Arizona team in scoring while playing a key role in a dominant season that saw just two regular season losses by a combined seven points. A strong, controlled combo guard, he played with excellent pace and balance, scoring efficiently at all three levels while making smart decisions within the flow of the offense. He proved comfortable both on and off the ball, consistently showing maturity in his shot selection and approach, and delivered big performances throughout the year, including a 29-point outing against BYU.

He did struggle on the biggest stage in the Final Four against Michigan, where foul trouble and an inefficient night, particularly a scoreless first half, limited his impact. Even so, scouts are unlikely to overreact given his full body of work, as his consistency, efficiency, and two-way contributions stood out over the course of the season. Burries competes defensively, rebounds well for his position, and plays with toughness and feel. While continuing to improve his ability to create separation against elite athletes will be important, he projects as a reliable, well-rounded guard with strong lottery consideration.

Why the Thunder select Brayden Burries: Burries fits seamlessly with Oklahoma City’s roster-building philosophy, giving the Thunder another high-upside talent to add to what is already the deepest roster in the league. A smooth scorer with strong instincts, he can create his own shot, space the floor, and make plays within the flow without needing heavy usage, while also bringing toughness and two-way potential that align naturally with the organization’s identity. At some point, however, Oklahoma City may need to begin consolidating pieces rather than simply continuing to add depth. The Thunder already possess an extremely crowded and talented guard rotation behind Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, including Jared McCain, Ajay Mitchell, Luguentz Dort, Alex Caruso, and Cason Wallace, giving them significant flexibility moving forward. That depth could ultimately allow Oklahoma City to package some of these players and future draft assets in pursuit of another young star. Even so, Burries represents the type of talent worth adding in this range, especially for a franchise still positioned to think long term while competing at a high level.

NBA Comparison: Jrue Holiday

13. Miami Heat – Labaron Philon

6’4”, 185, PG, Alabama, So.
2025–26 Stats: 33 GP, 22.0 PPG, 50.1 FG%, 39.9 3P%, 79.8 FT%, 3.5 RPG, 5.0 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 2.5 TO

Philon built on an impressive freshman campaign to become one of the most productive and dynamic guards in college basketball, making a major leap in both volume and efficiency. He averaged 22.0 points and 5.0 assists while dramatically improving as a three-point shooter, converting 2.5–6.2 per game (39.9%) after hitting just 31.5% as a freshman. His development as a pick-and-roll operator stood out, showing improved pace, control, and the ability to manipulate defenders while consistently creating scoring opportunities for himself and others. With good positional size, elite end-to-end speed, and a strong first step, he applied constant pressure on defenses and emerged as a true offensive engine.

Philon plays with a brash, competitive edge, embracing physicality and not shying away from trash talk or getting into opponents’ heads. His confidence and toughness are clear strengths, though his aggressive style can still lead to turnovers and occasional overextension as a decision-maker. Even so, his combination of scoring punch, improved shooting, and playmaking growth makes him one of the more intriguing backcourt prospects in the class. If he continues refining his decision-making, he projects as a high-level offensive guard capable of thriving in a modern NBA system.

Why the Heat select Labaron Philon: At No. 13, Miami continues reshaping its backcourt for the future by adding Philon, a young guard whose speed, confidence, and offensive creativity fit well within the organization’s developmental model while also providing excellent value in this range. With the Heat still searching for a long-term answer at point guard, Philon would enter a situation where he could compete with Davion Mitchell and Kasparas Jakucionis to emerge as the lead guard of the future. Miami has consistently valued toughness, competitiveness, and guards capable of creating offense under pressure, making Philon a natural developmental fit within their system. While there is still polish needed in parts of his game, the Heat would likely feel confident in their ability to maximize his talent and continue developing his decision-making and overall consistency over time.

NBA Comparison: Dejounte Murray

14. Charlotte Hornets – Karim Lopez

6’8”, 205, SF, Mexico, Intl. (New Zealand Breakers – NBL)
2025–26 Stats: 31 GP, 11.9 PPG, 50.2 FG%, 32.6 3P%, 71.7 FT%, 6.1 RPG, 2.0 APG, 1.2 SPG, 1.0 BPG, 3.0 TO

Lopez emerged as one of the more intriguing international wing prospects, offering a rare combination of size, fluid shooting mechanics, and all-around production while competing in Australia’s NBL. At 6’8”, he has an ideal frame for a modern wing, and his smooth perimeter stroke and confidence suggest more upside as a shooter than his 32.6% indicates. There are flashes of a Klay Thompson-type profile in his size and pure shooting ability, though he is not yet close to that level of consistency. He contributed across the board with rebounding, defensive activity, and efficient finishing, showing a well-rounded foundation against professional competition.

The evaluation still hinges on consistency, toughness, and overall impact. His performance at events like Eurocamp was uneven, and there are stretches where he fades or lacks a strong defensive edge. While his tools and shooting upside are clearly appealing, teams will want to see a more consistent motor and physical presence. Still, his combination of size, touch, and versatility makes him a strong candidate in this range, with upside tied to how much his shooting and competitiveness continue to develop.

NBA Comparison: Zaccharie Risacher

15. Chicago Bulls (via Trailblazers) – Cameron Carr

6’5”, 190, SG/SF, Tennessee, Jr.
2025–26 Stats: 34 GP, 18.9 PPG, 49.4 FG%, 37.4 3P%, 80.1 FT%, 5.8 RPG, 2.6 APG, 0.9 SPG, 1.3 BPG, 2.4 TO

Carr put together one of the more impressive breakout seasons among returning wings, emerging as a primary option after two quiet years at Tennessee where he struggled to find consistent opportunity. He made a major leap, showcasing his athleticism and skill set while averaging nearly 19 points per game with strong efficiency. A long, explosive athlete, he consistently attacked the rim and delivered highlight finishes, while also rediscovering the shooting ability that made him a highly regarded prospect out of high school. He converted 2.3–6.1 threes per game (37.4%), showing both volume and confidence as a perimeter scorer.

There are still areas for growth, particularly adding strength and toughness to better handle physical play, and his 2.4 turnovers per game stand out as an area that needs improvement as he continues to refine his decision-making. That said, the upside is significant. Carr flashes high-level three-and-D potential, with strong catch-and-shoot ability and the length and athleticism to disrupt passing lanes and guard multiple positions. While his development path took time, his breakout season reinforced his long-term upside as a two-way wing, with the tools to grow into a high-impact starter.

Why the Bulls select Cameron Carr: After landing Caleb Wilson at No. 4, Chicago continues adding youth, athleticism, and upside to its core, this time addressing the backcourt with Carr. A dynamic wing coming off a breakout season, Carr brings much-needed explosiveness, shot creation, and perimeter scoring ability to the roster. His ability to attack the rim, space the floor, and play above the rim gives the Bulls an element they have lacked in recent years, while his length and physical tools provide intriguing defensive upside as well. There is also a natural connection stylistically, as Carr’s game draws some comparisons to former Bull Zach LaVine with his smooth athleticism and scoring flashes. With his emergence as a high-volume, efficient perimeter scorer and his long-term two-way potential, Carr fits as another high-upside building block capable of growing alongside Wilson and the rest of Chicago’s young nucleus.

NBA Comparison: Zach LaVine

16. Memphis Grizzlies (via Magic) – Allen Graves

6’9”, 225, SF/PF, Santa Clara, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 35 GP, 11.8 PPG, 51.2 FG%, 41.3 3P%, 75.0 FT%, 6.5 RPG, 1.8 APG, 1.9 SPG, 0.9 BPG, 0.7 TO

Graves has emerged as one of the more intriguing analytics standouts in the class, producing highly efficient and well-rounded numbers despite coming off the bench for Santa Clara. A former point guard, he brings advanced feel, ball handling, and passing instincts for his size, allowing him to function as a connective piece offensively rather than a primary scorer. His defensive activity stands out, averaging nearly two steals and close to a block per game, showcasing his anticipation, length, and versatility. He also knocked down 1.1–2.6 threes per game (41.3%), a strong volume considering his role, giving him legitimate floor-spacing value to pair with his all-around impact.

He had a brief NCAA Tournament moment, delivering a clutch performance before Santa Clara was knocked out on a buzzer beater by Kentucky, slightly overshadowing his impact. Physically, he still has room to develop and become more assertive offensively, but his combination of size, efficiency, defensive instincts, and versatility is highly appealing. With his age, dimensions, and unique background, Graves has significant upside remaining and projects as a high-level connector at the next level, with the potential to grow into a much bigger role over time.

Why the Grizzlies select Allen Graves: At No. 16, Memphis lands one of the biggest analytical darlings in this year’s draft in Graves, making this feel like an almost perfect organizational fit. Widely viewed as one of the league’s most analytics-driven front offices, the Grizzlies have consistently targeted high-feel, versatile players who impact winning in multiple ways, and Graves checks nearly every box. A cerebral forward with strong passing instincts, defensive activity, efficient shooting, and excellent feel for the game, he thrives as a connective piece capable of elevating lineups without needing heavy usage. His versatility and unselfish approach fit seamlessly within Memphis’ style of play, while his all-around production and underlying metrics make him especially appealing in this range. There is still some uncertainty surrounding his draft status as he weighs whether to remain in the draft or follow through with the transfer portal, but from a stylistic and philosophical standpoint, this pairing feels almost tailor-made.

NBA Comparison: Boris Diaw / Kyle Anderson

17. Oklahoma City Thunder (via Philadelphia) –  Chris Cenac

6’11”, 240, PF/C, Houston, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 37 GP, 9.5 PPG, 48.5 FG%, 33.3 3P%, 62.1 FT%, 7.9 RPG, 0.7 APG, 0.8 SPG, 0.5 BPG, 0.9 TO

Cenac remained one of the more intriguing long-term big men in the class, offering a rare blend of size, mobility, and emerging perimeter skill for a 6’11” frontcourt prospect. His role within Houston’s structured system kept his scoring numbers modest, but his impact showed up through energy plays, rebounding, and efficient finishing around the rim. He ran the floor extremely well, played above the rim as a vertical threat, and flashed the ability to step out and hit perimeter shots. While his three-point numbers did not jump off the page, the form and touch suggest real long-term shooting potential, reinforcing his appeal as a modern floor-spacing big.

The overall production was somewhat underwhelming, highlighting that he is more of an upside selection who may take time to develop. His low block numbers also stand out as a concern, pointing to an area where he can improve as a rim protector. His consistency and defensive presence are still evolving, and continued strength gains will be important for him to handle physical matchups and anchor the paint more effectively. Even so, the combination of size, athleticism, and skill is difficult to ignore. Cenac’s development curve may be longer than some peers, but his tools and flashes of shooting and mobility give him significant long-term potential.

Why the Thunder select Chris Cenac: After selecting guard Brayden Burries at No. 12, Oklahoma City shifts focus to the frontcourt at No. 17, adding a high-upside developmental big man in Cenac. If the Thunder ultimately keep both first-round picks rather than packaging them in a move up the board, this type of balanced approach would make considerable sense. A move up for a player like Kingston Flemings could also be possible if Oklahoma City believes it can fix and stabilize his outside shot, something the organization has had success developing with young players in the past. Cenac offers intriguing long-term potential as a mobile modern big with size, length, and emerging perimeter skill, capable of running the floor, finishing above the rim, and potentially stretching the floor as he develops. While still somewhat raw, his physical tools and growth trajectory align well with Oklahoma City’s patient, development-focused philosophy. Jayden Quaintance is another possibility in this range, but Cenac’s combination of size, mobility, and upside makes him an especially appealing long-term investment for a Thunder team that continues to think both present and future simultaneously.

NBA Comparison: Kel’el Ware

18. Charlotte Hornets (via Magic, Suns) – Meleek Thomas

6’5”, 185, PG/SG, Arkansas, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 37 GP, 15.6 PPG, 43.5 FG%, 41.6 3P%, 84.3 FT%, 3.8 RPG, 2.5 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 1.0 TO

Thomas established himself as a natural scorer with a unique, unorthodox herky-jerky style that made him difficult to contain. He played with excellent pace and craft, using hesitation moves, sudden bursts, and long strides to create separation. His perimeter shooting was a major strength, knocking down 2.2–5.3 threes per game (41.6%) while also converting over 84% from the line, reinforcing his high-level scoring profile. Physically, he made significant strides over the course of the season, adding strength and appearing more filled out, a testament to Arkansas’ strength and conditioning program, which helped him better absorb contact and finish plays.

While he projects more as a combo guard than a true lead, his scoring instincts and shot-making ability give him clear value. Defensively, he showed active hands and competitiveness, and his low turnover rate reflected solid decision-making for a freshman. There is still room to grow in terms of playmaking and overall consistency, but his offensive skill set, improved frame, and ability to generate efficient scoring make him a strong sleeper candidate in this range with the potential to outperform his draft position.

Why the Hornets select Meleek Thomas: At No. 18, Charlotte adds a dynamic scoring guard to bolster the backcourt. Thomas offers strong value as a plug-and-play offensive option who can provide instant scoring punch. For a young team still building out its roster, adding a player capable of creating offense and producing in bursts has real appeal. He fits as a bench weapon who can change momentum, giving the Hornets another layer of scoring depth without requiring heavy usage or extended development time to be effective.

NBA Comparison: Leandro Barbosa / Jordan Hawkins

19. Toronto Raptors – Isaiah Evans

6’6”, 180, SG/SF, Duke, So.
2025–26 Stats: 38 GP, 15.0 PPG, 43.3 FG%, 36.1 3P%, 86.0 FT%, 3.2 RPG, 1.3 APG, 0.7 SPG, 0.7 BPG, 1.1 TO

Evans showed strong sophomore progression, displaying improved confidence and offensive polish while emerging as one of Duke’s primary perimeter scoring threats. He made a solid jump in production and showed flashes in the NCAA Tournament, reinforcing his scoring upside. A smooth, natural shot-maker, he expanded beyond a spot-up role, adding a more reliable midrange pull-up, improved finishing through contact, and flashes of secondary creation. His length and high release allowed him to generate clean looks over contests, and he moved well without the ball, consistently finding rhythm within the offense. His shooting profile stood out, converting 2.7–7.4 from three (36.1%) and 2.6–3.0 from the line (86.0%), reinforcing his status as a high-level perimeter shooter with strong touch.

The swing factor in his evaluation is his frame and overall physical development. Adding strength and muscle will be key to unlocking the rest of his game, as it should improve his ability to impact areas beyond scoring, including rebounding, defense, and playmaking. While his length and shooting combination are rare and highly appealing, some evaluators question whether he does enough outside of scoring at this stage to justify a firm lottery projection. Still, his confidence, scoring instincts, and shot-making ability give him a clear pathway to becoming a high-level wing if his body continues to develop.

Why the Raptors select Isaiah Evans: Duke sharpshooter Isaiah Evans gives Toronto another long-term perimeter scoring piece to continue building around its young core while providing excellent upside value at No. 19. A smooth, natural shot-maker with excellent shooting versatility and off-ball instincts, Evans fits the type of lengthy wing archetype the Raptors have consistently valued. His ability to space the floor and create secondary offense would add another dimension to the roster, while his frame and scoring style draw some similarities to Brandon Ingram. Considering the Raptors already traded for Brandon Ingram, it is clear the organization values that type of long, skilled scoring wing, making Evans an especially intriguing developmental fit. He could benefit from learning behind a player with comparable physical and stylistic traits while gradually growing into a similar role over time. While Evans still needs to add strength and improve consistency in other areas, the upside as a fluid perimeter scorer makes him a very appealing swing in this range for Toronto.

NBA Comparison: Brandon Ingram

20. San Antonio (via Hawks) – Bennett Stirtz

6’4”, 185, PG, Iowa, Sr.
2025–26 Stats: 37 GP, 19.8 PPG, 47.7 FG%, 35.8 3P%, 84.8 FT%, 2.6 RPG, 4.4 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 1.8 TO

Stirtz proved his production translated seamlessly to the Big Ten, leading Iowa on a deep tournament run with a scrappy roster while continuing to produce at a high level. He played with excellent pace and composure, consistently making quick reads and organizing the offense, with his passing and facilitation standing out as a major strength. He also showed solid three-point volume at 2.5–6.9 per game (35.8%), reinforcing his ability to space the floor and keep defenses honest. His ability to overachieve against more athletic competition underscored his feel, competitiveness, and leadership, as he controlled games without forcing action and consistently elevated teammates.

There are still questions about how his game translates physically at the NBA level, particularly in terms of size, speed, and athleticism, but his intangibles and steady improvement are difficult to ignore. After progressing from the Division II level to Drake and then Iowa, he continued to get better each step of the way. His shooting, decision-making, and toughness give him a strong foundation as a rotation guard, and while his upside may be limited compared to younger prospects, his competitiveness, determination, and feel for the game should allow him to carve out a role.

Why the Spurs select Bennett Stirtz: At No. 20, San Antonio adds a steady, reliable lead guard presence in Stirtz, giving the roster another stabilizing piece to complement its young core. While this may be viewed as a slight reach relative to consensus projections, Stirtz offers the type of feel, competitiveness, and decision-making the Spurs have traditionally valued. He brings strong passing instincts, pace control, and the ability to organize an offense, helping elevate those around him without needing high usage. Stylistically, he projects somewhat in the mold of a T.J. McConnell-type presence, capable of bringing energy, toughness, and steady playmaking off the bench, though there may also be some sneaky upside beyond that role if his shooting and overall offensive confidence continue developing. For a Spurs team continuing to prioritize culture, IQ, and connective players, Stirtz fits naturally within the system.

NBA Comparison: Steve Blake

21. Detroit Pistons (via Timberwolves) – Aday Mara

7’4”, 255, C, Michigan, Jr.
2025–26 Stats: 40 GP, 23.4 MIN, 66.8 FG%, 30.0 3P%, 56.4 FT%, 6.8 RPG, 2.4 APG, 2.6 BPG, 0.4 SPG, 2.2 PF, 2.0 TO, 12.1 PPG

Mara played a major role in Michigan’s National Championship run, delivering some of his best basketball during the NCAA Tournament and emerging as one of the more intriguing long-term big men in the class. A former elite European prospect from Spain who initially struggled to fully adjust during his first two seasons at UCLA, Mara finally began putting everything together in a larger role at Michigan. Coming from a family of athletes, he possesses impressive coordination and feel for a player with his massive frame, showing advanced touch, passing instincts, and offensive IQ uncommon for a player his size. He further impressed evaluators during the pre-draft process by measuring a massive 7’3” barefoot with an enormous 9’9” standing reach. Offensively, Mara thrives as a rim runner, interior finisher, and connective passer, shooting an outstanding 66.8% from the field while also flashing occasional perimeter touch. His 2.4 assists per game highlight his vision and ability to facilitate offense from the high post or short roll, consistently making smart reads and keeping the ball moving.

Defensively, Mara’s length and timing make him a major rim protection presence, averaging 2.6 blocks per game while altering countless additional shots around the basket. He rebounds effectively and provides a massive interior presence capable of anchoring the paint. There are still clear areas that require development, however. Mara lacks ideal mobility in space and can struggle defending quicker actions away from the rim. His outside shooting remains inconsistent, and his free throw percentage leaves questions about how much shooting upside will fully translate. Like many extremely tall big men, he has needed time to grow into his body physically. Still, the combination of size, passing feel, rim protection, and improving offensive polish makes him one of the more unique frontcourt prospects available in this range.

Why the Pistons select Aday Mara: At No. 21, Detroit keeps Mara in the state of Michigan after helping lead the Wolverines to a National Championship. While this may be viewed as a slight reach relative to some projections, the Pistons add a highly intriguing developmental big man who bolsters the frontcourt with size, length, and interior presence. Mara’s passing ability, rim protection, and offensive feel give him an uncommon skill set for a 7’3” center, while his continued development suggests there may still be untapped upside ahead. Detroit can afford to be patient with his growth, allowing him to develop behind an established young core while adding another long-term piece to the rotation. There is also some precedent for this type of late-rising big man moving much higher than expected. Khaman Maluach ultimately climbed into the top 10 after at one point grading closer to a borderline first-round prospect early in his draft process, so seeing Mara ultimately work his way securely into the top 20 or even higher would not come as a major surprise.

NBA Comparison: Luke Kornet / Khaman Maluach

22. Philadelphia 76ers (via Thunder, Rockets) – Morez Johnson

6’9”, 235, PF/C, Michigan, So.
2025–26 Stats: 40 GP, 13.1 PPG, 62.3 FG%, 34.3 3P%, 78.2 FT%, 7.3 RPG, 1.2 APG, 0.7 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 1.3 TO

23. Atlanta Hawks (via Cavaliers) – Jayden Quaintance

6’10”, 250, PF/C Kentucky, So.
Stats (4 GP): 5.0 PPG, 5.0 RPG, 0.5 APG, 57.1 FG%, 0.0 3P%, 30.8 FT%

Quaintance is one of the more physically gifted frontcourt prospects in the class, bringing strength, explosiveness, and a high motor to the interior. A transfer from Arizona State who was not draft-eligible as a freshman, he entered the season with significant buzz but has struggled to stay on the floor due to injuries and limited availability. When healthy, his physical upside is evident. He plays above the rim, looks to finish everything with force, and impacts the game through energy, rebounding, and defensive activity. He further boosted his profile during the pre-draft process by measuring a massive 7’5.25” wingspan at the NBA Draft Combine, confirming true center size and exceptional length on a 6’10” frame. His tools, strength, and athleticism give him the foundation of a modern role-playing big who can run the floor, protect the paint, and provide physical presence.

Offensively, Quaintance remains a work in progress. While he shows occasional touch around the basket, his scoring skill level is still developing, and his limited range and free throw struggles highlight the need for continued refinement. His long-term value projects more around defense, rebounding, and finishing within a defined role rather than offensive creation. Despite early hype that placed him in the top-10 conversation, his current trajectory points more toward the late first-round range. With his physical tools and defensive potential, he fits the mold of a Kevon Looney-type contributor at the next level, capable of impacting games through toughness, interior defense, and effort while continuing to develop his offensive feel.

Why the Hawks select Jayden Quaintance: At No. 23, after adding Kingston Flemings at No. 7, Atlanta turns to the frontcourt and takes a developmental swing on Quaintance’s physical tools and long-term upside. His strength, explosiveness, and motor give him immediate value as a rim runner, rebounder, and defensive presence, capable of bringing energy in limited minutes. While his offensive game is still raw, the Hawks can afford patience, allowing him to focus on finishing, protecting the paint, and doing the dirty work. With time and improved feel, Quaintance has the potential to grow into a reliable rotation big, making him a worthwhile investment as Atlanta continues to build out its young core.

NBA Comparison: Kevon Looney

24. New York Knicks – Joshua Johnson

6’9”, 240, F, Iowa State, Sr.
2025–26 Stats: 35 GP, 30.9 MPG, 16.4 PPG, 7.4 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1.6 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 47.1% FG, 34.5% 3P%, 70.0% FT

Johnson is a strong, skilled point forward type who brings a mature, well-rounded game and the versatility to contribute immediately. At 6’9”, 240 pounds, he has the size and strength to match up at either forward spot, using his physicality and toughness to hold his own defensively and on the glass. His best attribute is his passing, as he consistently makes advanced reads, facilitates offense from the high post or perimeter, and keeps the ball moving with purpose. While not an explosive athlete, he compensates with feel, positioning, and skill, showing the ability to handle, create in a secondary role, and knock down perimeter shots at a respectable rate. His production across the board—particularly as a rebounder and playmaker—highlights his impact as a connector who fills gaps and elevates team play.

Why the Knicks select Joshua Johnson: New York adds a ready-made contributor who fits seamlessly into a competitive roster. Johnson’s versatility, toughness, and unselfish style align perfectly with the Knicks’ identity, giving them a dependable forward who can play within structure while adding another layer of playmaking. His ability to facilitate from the frontcourt and make quick decisions enhances offensive flow, particularly alongside high-usage scorers. With his size and strength, he can defend multiple positions and handle the physical demands of playoff basketball. For a team looking to contend, Johnson offers a high-floor option who can step into a rotation role early and impact winning without needing the ball in his hands to be effective.

NBA Comparison: Joe Ingles / Josh Giddey

25. Los Angeles Lakers – Christian Anderson 

6’2”, 180, PG, Texas Tech, So.
2025–26 Stats: 33 GP, 18.5 PPG, 47.2 FG%, 41.5 3P%, 80.5 FT%, 3.6 RPG, 7.4 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 3.3 TO

Anderson put together a big sophomore season, emerging as one of the more productive and efficient lead guards in the country. Despite standing just 6’2”, he consistently controlled games with his pace, feel, and ability to run a team. A smooth playmaker, he excelled in pick-and-roll situations, creating quality looks for both himself and teammates while posting strong assist numbers. His shooting was a major strength, knocking down 41.5% from three, giving him the ability to space the floor and punish defenses that played off him. Even after Texas Tech lost Toppin, the team continued to perform at a high level under Anderson’s leadership.

His size will be a key point of evaluation, as smaller guards must prove they can consistently hold up defensively and create advantages at the next level. While he may not have elite physical tools, his skill level, shooting, and decision-making stand out, supported by strong analytics and efficiency. Born April 2, 2006, and a dual citizen of the United States and Germany, Anderson brings a mature floor game and steady presence, projecting as a reliable rotation point guard who can organize an offense and provide scoring punch.

Why the Lakers select Christian Anderson: At No. 25, Los Angeles adds a polished, high-IQ guard in Anderson, giving them a change-of-pace option off the bench. His ability to control tempo, run pick-and-roll, and make consistent reads makes him a strong fit as a secondary ball handler who can stabilize second units. He brings a solid blend of readiness and upside as a sophomore, with the shooting ability to space the floor and complement star players. While his size presents some defensive limitations, his feel, poise, and decision-making should allow him to carve out a reliable rotation role early in his career.

NBA Comparison: Kennedy Chandler

26. Denver Nuggets – Dailyn Swain

6’7”, 220, SF, Texas, Jr.
2025–26 Stats: 36 GP, 17.3 PPG, 7.5 RPG, 3.6 APG, 54.2 FG%, 34.4 3P%, 81.5 FT%

Swain put together a strong junior season in his lone year at Texas, emerging as a key piece on a team that made a deep NCAA Tournament run to the Sweet 16. An explosive slashing wing with an NBA-ready frame, he thrives attacking downhill, using his quick first step, improved handle, and high-level athleticism to pressure the rim and finish through contact. He showed real growth as an on-ball creator, operating effectively in isolation and pick-and-roll while flashing point-forward ability with solid vision and passing instincts (3.6 APG). Swain is especially dangerous in transition, where his speed and leaping ability make him a constant threat. He also impacted the game across multiple areas, rebounding at a high level for a wing (7.5 RPG) and generating turnovers defensively (1.6 SPG) with his length and anticipation. His efficiency jump as a junior, combined with an 81.5 percent free throw mark, points to encouraging long-term shooting development.

There are still areas that will determine his ultimate ceiling. While his three-point percentage (34.4%) is respectable, it comes on modest volume (0.9 makes on 2.6 attempts), leaving questions about how reliable his shooting will be at the next level. His handle, though improved, can still get loose in traffic, contributing to turnovers (2.7 per game), and his offensive approach can lean too heavily on isolation. He is not yet a polished shot creator, with footwork and decision-making still developing, particularly against higher-level defenses. Defensively, he has the tools to be impactful, but consistency and focus can waver at times. Swain is generally viewed as a first-round talent, offering an appealing blend of athleticism, versatility, and upward trajectory, but his draft range will depend on continued development as a shooter, decision-maker, and all-around offensive creator.

Why the Nuggets select Dailyn Swain: At No. 26, Swain offers a blend of athleticism, versatility, and relative readiness that fits Denver’s win-now timeline in the heart of Nikola Jokić’s prime. As a junior, he brings more immediate polish than many prospects in this range, with the ability to contribute as a slashing wing who can attack closeouts, finish through contact, and add a needed dose of athleticism on the perimeter. His rebounding and secondary playmaking also align well with Denver’s system, where ball movement and cutting are emphasized. While his shooting consistency and decision-making remain areas to monitor, Swain gives the Nuggets an energetic, downhill presence who can complement their core and provide depth on the wing as they continue to chase contention.

NBA Comparison: Terrence Jones / Kelly Oubre Jr.

27. Boston Celtics – Koa Peat

6’8”, 235, PF, Arizona, Fr.
2025–26 Stats: 36 GP, 14.1 PPG, 5.6 RPG, 2.6 APG, 52.8 FG%, 35.0 3P%, 62.3 FT%

Peat delivered a productive freshman season built around strength, skill, and physical maturity, showing the polish and interior feel that made him one of the most accomplished high school players in recent Arizona history. He played a key role in helping Arizona reach the Final Four, providing steady scoring, toughness, and reliability on both ends. At 6’8”, 235 pounds, he consistently used his powerful frame, balance, and advanced footwork to establish position, finish efficiently around the basket, and play through contact. His passing out of the post and comfort operating as both a scorer and facilitator inside the arc remained clear strengths, and his high-IQ, team-first approach translated to consistent winning impact.

His limitations became more evident late in the season against top competition. Arizona’s Final Four run highlighted his value, but also exposed some offensive constraints, particularly his lack of scoring versatility and ability to create outside of the paint. While his three-point percentage (35.0%) appears solid, it came on extremely low volume with just seven made threes on the season, limiting its reliability. Combined with a 62.3 percent free throw mark, there are legitimate concerns about his long-term shooting and spacing value. He is not an elite athlete and lacks ideal size or length for a full-time NBA power forward, which can make it more difficult to consistently finish or create against bigger, more athletic defenders. Those factors cap some of the upside, but in the late first-round range, his toughness, feel, and inside-the-arc productivity still project well as a reliable rotation forward if the shooting continues to improve.

Why the Celtics select Koa Peat: At No. 27, Peat fits the mold of the type of undervalued, tough-minded forward Boston has historically targeted. From Glen Davis to Grant Williams, those were Danny Ainge-era picks, but the broader philosophy of going against the grain to find value has remained intact under Brad Stevens. That makes this a logical spot to take a chance on a proven, productive player if he falls into this range. Peat’s strength, interior scoring, and passing feel give him a pathway to contribute as a rotation piece, and the perceived limitations in his shooting and athletic profile could make him a motivated, chip-on-his-shoulder addition in a winning environment.

NBA Comparison: Chuck Hayes / Trevor Booker 

28. Minnesota Timberwolves (via Pistons) – Milan Momcilovic

6’8”, 225, PF, Iowa St, Jr.
2025–26 Stats: 37 GP, 30.5 MIN, 50.6 FG%, 48.7 3P%, 87.8 FT%, 3.1 RPG, 1.0 APG, 0.2 BPG, 0.8 SPG, 1.6 PF, 0.8 TO, 16.9 PPG

Momcilovic put together a strong junior season, establishing himself as one of the premier shooters in college basketball and arguably the top three-point marksman in the country. He combined elite efficiency with outstanding volume, consistently stretching defenses with deep range, quick release, and excellent shot preparation. At 6’8”, 225 pounds, he offers good positional size and strength, allowing him to hold his own physically while operating primarily as a perimeter weapon. He thrives in structured offensive systems, showing a strong understanding of spacing, timing, and shot selection, rarely forcing looks and capitalizing on opportunities both spotting up and relocating off the ball. His 48.7 percent from three and 87.8 percent from the free throw line reinforce his legitimacy as an elite-level shooter with clear NBA translation, capable of swinging momentum quickly when he finds rhythm.

However, his overall profile remains heavily dependent on his shooting. He is not an elite athlete and lacks burst, lateral quickness, and vertical explosiveness, which impacts both his defensive versatility and ability to create offense. His limitations were evident at times against top competition, where he struggled to generate scoring outside of catch-and-shoot situations or against tighter, more physical defenders. He offers minimal shot creation and playmaking (1.0 apg), and his defensive limitations, particularly guarding in space, remain a concern. While his elite shooting gives him a clear NBA pathway, his role will likely be specialized, making fit and development critical. In the late first to early second round range, his shooting alone makes him an attractive option, but improving defensive consistency and adding even modest off-the-dribble scoring would significantly raise his ceiling.

Why the Timberwolves select Milan Momcilovic: Minnesota adds one of the premier shooting specialists in the class in Momcilovic, giving a contending roster another NBA-ready floor spacer capable of contributing early off the bench. Arguably the top pure three-point shooter available, his deep range, quick release, and high-level efficiency make him an ideal complementary piece alongside the Timberwolves’ core, helping create additional spacing and offensive balance. His ability to play without needing the ball fits naturally within a veteran rotation built around established scorers and creators. While his overall game remains somewhat limited outside of his shooting, that elite floor-spacing ability alone gives him a clear NBA role. There is still some uncertainty surrounding his draft status, as strong NIL opportunities could entice him to return to school, meaning a team may need to offer some level of assurance to secure his commitment this late in the first round. For a win-now team like Minnesota, adding a polished shooting weapon at this stage of the draft could prove to be strong value.

NBA Comparison: Nikola Mirotic / Davis Bertans

29. Cleveland Cavaliers (via Spurs) – Ebuka Okorie

Momcilovic put together a strong junior season, establishing himself as one of the premier shooters in college basketball and arguably the top three-point marksman in the country. He combined elite efficiency with outstanding volume, consistently stretching defenses with deep range, quick release, and excellent shot preparation. At 6’8”, 225 pounds, he offers good positional size and strength, allowing him to hold his own physically while operating primarily as a perimeter weapon. He thrives in structured offensive systems, showing a strong understanding of spacing, timing, and shot selection, rarely forcing looks and capitalizing on opportunities both spotting up and relocating off the ball. His 48.7 percent from three and 87.8 percent from the free throw line reinforce his legitimacy as an elite-level shooter with clear NBA translation, capable of swinging momentum quickly when he finds rhythm.

However, his overall profile remains heavily dependent on his shooting. He is not an elite athlete and lacks burst, lateral quickness, and vertical explosiveness, which impacts both his defensive versatility and ability to create offense. His limitations were evident at times against top competition, where he struggled to generate scoring outside of catch-and-shoot situations or against tighter, more physical defenders. He offers minimal shot creation and playmaking (1.0 apg), and his defensive limitations, particularly guarding in space, remain a concern. While his elite shooting gives him a clear NBA pathway, his role will likely be specialized, making fit and development critical. In the late first to early second round range, his shooting alone makes him an attractive option, but improving defensive consistency and adding even modest off-the-dribble scoring would significantly raise his ceiling.

Why the Cavaliers select Ebuka Okorie: At No. 29, Cleveland adds a talented young scoring guard in Okorie to help address the long-term outlook of the backcourt following the trade that sent Darius Garland away in exchange for James Harden. One of the more productive freshmen in the country, Okorie brings shot creation, scoring punch, and the ability to generate offense off the dribble, giving the Cavaliers another young perimeter talent to develop over time. His aggressive scoring mentality and ability to create his own shot would add an offensive spark to the roster while fitting well within a developmental role early in his career. If he ultimately keeps his name in the draft, this could prove to be very solid value late in the first round given his production, youth, and long-term scoring upside.

NBA Comparison: Payton Prichard

30. Dallas Mavericks (via OKC Thunder) – Tyler Tanner