Mock draft 2026

[twslam07]

Wagler intrigues me as well.

The fact that his 3PAR and FTAR are both above 47.5% is pretty impressive and unique…

So unique that I did a little bit of research to see how many top 10 picks in the past 20 years had both a 3PAR and FTAR above 47.5%. This is the list…

Eric Gordon (2008)
Nik Stauskas (2014)
Luka Doncic (2018)

That’s it. 3 players out of a pool of 200 top 10 selections. Damian Lillard barely missed the cut (.465 3PAR and .519 FTAR) and there are a couple others that were somewhat close like Trae Young (.531 3PAR and .443 FTAR) & Bradley Beal (.473 3PAR and .440 FTAR).

On top of that unique scoring profile, Wagler is an impressive passer/playmaker. So much so that he has a 2.46 AST:TO…as a freshman. He’s better in that metric compared to that list of 3 players (Doncic = 2.08, Stauskas = 1.76, and Gordon = 0.68).

Again, he has an interesting, unique scoring profile which seems to mesh very well with where the NBA has gone (threes and get to the FT line) and he’s a very good passer & playmaker who could have the potential to play a PG like role. Factor in that he’s 6’6”, a freshman, not a horrible defender, and you have quite a prospect on your hands.

 

[Joshyjosh31]

Wagler intrigues me as well.

The fact that his 3PAR and FTAR are both above 47.5% is pretty impressive and unique…

So unique that I did a little bit of research to see how many top 10 picks in the past 20 years had both a 3PAR and FTAR above 47.5%. This is the list…

Eric Gordon (2008)
Nik Stauskas (2014)
Luka Doncic (2018)

That’s it. 3 players out of a pool of 200 top 10 selections. Damian Lillard barely missed the cut (.465 3PAR and .519 FTAR) and there are a couple others that were somewhat close like Trae Young (.531 3PAR and .443 FTAR) & Bradley Beal (.473 3PAR and .440 FTAR).

On top of that unique scoring profile, Wagler is an impressive passer/playmaker. So much so that he has a 2.46 AST:TO…as a freshman. He’s better in that metric compared to that list of 3 players (Doncic = 2.08, Stauskas = 1.76, and Gordon = 0.68).

Again, he has an interesting, unique scoring profile which seems to mesh very well with where the NBA has gone (threes and get to the FT line) and he’s a very good passer & playmaker who could have the potential to play a PG like role. Factor in that he’s 6’6”, a freshman, not a horrible defender, and you have quite a prospect on your hands.

His defense in the houston game was impressive and for someone lacking strength/athleticism he gets to the line a lot like you pointed out

I like how versatile it will be to build around him compared to guys like flemming or Acuff with his size we could still draft another PG and not low size in the lineup

 

[jiimbob]

Yeah, if we’re outside the top four Wagler intrigues me most.
Figure a way to resign Precious as a big and build around a good sized front court.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Yes. He's my Dad.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Burries is a guard a lot of people are sleeping on. He has good size and plays both ends of the court.

I think it's because he's old for a Freshman (will be 21 when the season tips off). That's all I got.

 

[twslam07]

His defense in the houston game was impressive and for someone lacking strength/athleticism he gets to the line a lot like you pointed out

I like how versatile it will be to build around him compared to guys like flemming or Acuff with his size we could still draft another PG and not low size in the lineup

I have Flemings below both Wagler and Acuff at this point but the Wagler/Acuff debate is ongoing for me. Perhaps the combine measurements will be the final data point to tilt it one way or another.

But the case for Acuff is also notable compared to Wagler…

- Dawg mentality (Wagler doesn’t give me the same feeling when I watch him but it’s admittedly a “feeling”
- Volume scoring (averages 5.1 more points than Wagler per 36 min)
- Efficiency on that volume scoring (.604 TS% vs Wagler’s .597 TS%)
- AST:TO ratio (2.97 vs. Wagler’s 2.46)
- Strength (Acuff’s built like a football player and can create space with that strength. Wagler is lacking here but he has time to add it)
- Length (Acuff reportedly measured with a +4.5-5 inch wingspan meaning his wingspan is 4.5-5 inches longer than his height. Wagler’s wingspan is a little more up in the air but I’m seeing guesses of around 6’10”-7’0”. I don’t know if that’s accurate, but that would be very good for his draft stock. But coming back to Acuff…a 6’3” PG with a 6’7.5-6’8” wingspan and good strength is a good physical profile.)


I like Wagler as the better outside threat (his range beyond the line is eye popping). He’s obviously taller (and very likely longer) and he’s a better defender with the opportunity to be a solid NBA defender (as you already alluded to) which I don’t feel confident in saying about Acuff. But gun to my head, I think I favor Acuff’s offensive game more in the NBA which might get me to pull the trigger since we’re star hunting.

 

[Capt. Factorial]

I think it's because he's old for a Freshman (will be 21 when the season tips off). That's all I got.

I think it's more that he's not a primary ball handler, and depending on how you define it this draft has 6 potentially elite ball handlers, which is that first element you really need to build a modern NBA team around. And he's probably going to measure out a bit small for an off guard - not terribly small - and maybe he'll have length to make up for it (I saw an estimate of a wingspan of 6'5" which isn't really head-turning).

I think offensively the best-case scenario is a guy like Jamal Murray - not really coming up as a primary ball handler but then demonstrating that yeah, actually he's that guy too in the NBA. So, you know, a really good player. I expect him to be drafted top-ten and can't see him falling out of the lottery in any case, it's just that this draft is loaded loaded LOADED with on-ball talent.

 

[bajaden]

I understand where you’re coming from. But Demar and Ingram are big outliers, and they play positions where you definitely want more 3s.

At the 1 spot, would it surprise you if the shot distribution for all-stars this year averaged 1/3 3pt, 1/3 at the rim, 1/3 midrange?

Sometimes I get confused with this negetivity with the midrange shot. Kevin Durant scores most of his points in the misrange. Dito Paul George, Kahwi Leonard, etc. Yes, it's only 2 pts instead of 3, but at the end of the day if he ends up with 20 pts on 55% shooting to go along with double digit rebounds, who cares? As long as a player is efficent, that's all that matters to me.

I'd rather have a player that scores 20 pt's on 10 or less shots, than a player that scores 30 pt's on 22 shots!

 

[bajaden]

He’s got a really good all around game. But he’s not really a kid. He’s older than Paolo Banchero

If Yaxel was 19 yr's old he'd be a top five pick. I've been following him for a couple of years now and he's one of those players thats a winner. There's not much he can't do. He's a player thats going to be a difference maker on a contending team. If I had a second 1st rd pick, and he was there, I'd grab him in a heart beat.

 

[bajaden]

I have Flemings below both Wagler and Acuff at this point but the Wagler/Acuff debate is ongoing for me. Perhaps the combine measurements will be the final data point to tilt it one way or another.

But the case for Acuff is also notable compared to Wagler…

- Dawg mentality (Wagler doesn’t give me the same feeling when I watch him but it’s admittedly a “feeling”
- Volume scoring (averages 5.1 more points than Wagler per 36 min)
- Efficiency on that volume scoring (.604 TS% vs Wagler’s .597 TS%)
- AST:TO ratio (2.97 vs. Wagler’s 2.46)
- Strength (Acuff’s built like a football player and can create space with that strength. Wagler is lacking here but he has time to add it)
- Length (Acuff reportedly measured with a +4.5-5 inch wingspan meaning his wingspan is 4.5-5 inches longer than his height. Wagler’s wingspan is a little more up in the air but I’m seeing guesses of around 6’10”-7’0”. I don’t know if that’s accurate, but that would be very good for his draft stock. But coming back to Acuff…a 6’3” PG with a 6’7.5-6’8” wingspan and good strength is a good physical profile.)


I like Wagler as the better outside threat (his range beyond the line is eye popping). He’s obviously taller (and very likely longer) and he’s a better defender with the opportunity to be a solid NBA defender (as you already alluded to) which I don’t feel confident in saying about Acuff. But gun to my head, I think I favor Acuff’s offensive game more in the NBA which might get me to pull the trigger since we’re star hunting.

I really like Acuff, but I have a serious problem with his lack of defense. Not saying he can't improve, but he has a long way to go to get where it's acceptable. I still have Fleming ahead of him, and one of the reasons is that Flemings is a very good defender, and also, a good shooter! While I'll give Acuff the edge on athleticism, don't go to sleep on Flemings, he's a surprisingly good athlete, who can explode and blow right by you.

Both players have excellent court vision and both are excellent passers. The biggest difference is that Acuff looks like a star and Flemings looks like a blue collar player who is always composed and looks in charge at all times. He doesn't come with all the bells and whistles that Acuff has.