Five End-of-Season Takeaways: Final Thoughts on the 2026 NBA Draft Class
Revisiting five preseason beliefs and what he learned about the 2026 NBA Draft class from October through March.
Back in October, I wrote about five early findings on the 2026 NBA Draft class—some questions, some concerns, and a few themes that stood out heading into the season. At the halfway point, those ideas were revisited based on how things were playing out. Now, with the season complete, it’s time to take a step back and look at the bigger picture.
What actually held up? What changed? And what did we learn about the 2026 NBA Draft class over the course of the year?
For those just jumping in, this piece closes the loop on that process—moving from preseason assumptions, to midseason adjustments, to final end-of-season takeaways.
Offseason Finding #1: Is This Class Barren on Big Men?
Midseason Update: Yes
End-of-Season Takeaway: Not Top-Heavy—But Deeper Than Expected
Within the position groups of the 2026 NBA Draft Class, the perception of the big men probably varies the most among evaluators. I’ve been of the mindset that there are a number of players who could be impactful—but in terms of high-end talent, this class still feels a bit light.
Back in October and January—the checkpoints for this series—I led this discussion with Chris Cenac Jr. and Jayden Quaintance. At this point in the cycle, neither player sits atop my board at the position.
Instead, it’s Aday Mara who has emerged as my top big man.
Mara’s stock coming into the season at Michigan was about as low as it could have been for a player of his profile, but he’s steadily rebuilt that perception through consistent defensive production and functional offensive utility. His play in the Big Ten Tournament and the NCAA Tournament only added to that momentum. From March 13th through the end of the season, Mara averaged 14.4 PPG, 6.1 RPG, 2.7 APG, and 2.9 BPG. He’s also won a National Championship while serving as a major contributor.
The footwork stands out immediately. On the block, he’s quick, controlled, and efficient—able to create advantages without overextending himself. That same foot speed shows up defensively, where he’s shown the ability to switch onto smaller players and survive more often than you’d expect at his size. There’s a comfortable floor here in the mold of Ryan Kalkbrenner, but Mara offers more offensive upside with the passing feel he brings. He’s grown into a Top 10 prospect for me, currently at #9.
Even with that, the broader perception of the position doesn’t change much.
After Mara, things get murkier.
Jayden Quaintance remains one of the more difficult evaluations in the class. Since the midseason update, we simply haven’t seen him due to injury. That lack of recent film makes projection tricky—especially when his strongest showing came in his return against St. John’s, where he finished with 10 points, eight rebounds, and two blocks.
The appeal is still there. He’s a defensive menace with real tools, and there are flashes of high-end passing feel. But offensively, a lot of his game still lives in that arm’s reach space. Even if you’re optimistic about the passing, he doesn’t clearly separate within the position group in that regard. There’s upside here, but not enough clarity—especially with the missed time—to anchor him at the top.
From there, the defining characteristic of this group becomes clear: density.
There’s a glut of bigs who have shown real value, but haven’t separated themselves in a meaningful way. Motiejus Krivas is a good example. He wasn’t part of my midseason discussion, but has climbed boards largely through steady production rather than standout dominance.
At 7’2” and 260 pounds, Krivas has been a strong defensive presence for Arizona. Among players with at least a 60% minutes share and a BPM above 5, he ranks fifth in block percentage. He rebounds well, protects the rim, and offers just enough shooting projection to be interesting. It’s a valuable archetype—but not one that clearly separates him from the pack.
Tarris Reed Jr. fits into that same tier, though his rise has been more visible due to his play in March. His 30/20 performance in the tournament brought more attention to a season where he averaged 14.7 PPG, 8.8 RPG, 2.4 APG, and 2.1 BPG on over 62% shooting. Reed excels at the foundational responsibilities of the position while also offering some passing ability, making him an appealing option for teams looking for stability inside.
Beyond that, players like Patrick Ngongba II, Flory Bidunga, Henri Veesaar, and Zuby Ejiofor round out a group of viable options—many of whom could return to school and benefit from a thinner 2027 class. The common thread isn’t a lack of talent, but a lack of separation.
That brings things back to Chris Cenac Jr.
Cenac has improved over the course of the season, but mostly in subtle ways. The rebounding numbers are strong, and he moves well—especially at his size. However, the areas that he needed to solidify never fully came together. Defensively, he’s still vulnerable in low-man and help situations, with offenses comfortable targeting him. Offensively, he’s more comfortable operating as a perimeter-oriented big, but the volume and efficiency aren’t strong enough to serve as a foundation. He also doesn’t generate much free-throw pressure, and there isn’t much confidence in his ability to extend plays as a decision-maker in DHOs.
The potential is still intriguing—but in a class like this, teams may not be eager to bet on it early. From his perspective, it’s hard to imagine settling in the 20s if that’s where the market lands.
That’s ultimately what defines this position.
There are real players here. There are useful archetypes. But there isn’t clear separation at the top. Instead, the value lives in the middle—where multiple bigs could reasonably be selected across the late lottery to late first, depending on team philosophy.
The concern wasn’t entirely wrong—it was just slightly misapplied. This isn’t a barren group.
It’s a group without a clear headliner.
Offseason Finding #2: The Guards WILL Heavily Impact the Quality of this Draft Class
Midseason Update: Even More Than I Expected
End-of-Season Takeaway: The Guards DEFINE This Class
While I had some healthy skepticism among the big men—even in October—it was clear that the guards in the 2026 NBA Draft Class were going to have the greatest impact on the class’s perception and quality. I followed up in my midseason update that—even though I expected that impact—I still underestimated just how significant it would be.
Today, it’s clear: the guards define the 2026 NBA Draft.
Darius Acuff Jr. has gone from a player who could be this class’s “PG1” to the outright favorite. On the No Ceilings 2026 NBA Draft Big Board V.6, he ranked as the top point guard and the fifth overall prospect. Acuff has established himself as one of the best offensive players in the class, toggling between high-level passing and effortless scoring.
He’s answered most of the questions that followed him into the season. Would he be a self-serving scorer? He posted a 32.2 assist percentage and led the SEC in assists per game. How reliable is the shot? He hit 44% from deep on nine attempts per 100 possessions. Can he finish? He shot 58.1% at the rim.
The biggest question now is defense. His effort has been inconsistent; there’s no way around that. Can it improve? Probably. But teams will have to decide how much they value that improvement versus what he already brings offensively.
Brayden Burries was almost a throwaway mention in my midseason update, but he’s since surged up boards over the past few months. What makes Burries interesting is that he’s done this while playing off a traditional point guard, forcing him to sink or swim as a complementary player.
He averaged 16.1 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 2.5 APG, and 1.5 SPG on 50/40/81 splits. Nearly 30% of his possessions came in pick-and-roll, where he ranked in the 89th percentile as a scorer. What’s subtle—but important—is that when you factor in passing, his turnover percentage drops.
With his size, strength, and two-way profile, there’s real versatility here. It wouldn’t be crazy if we looked up in a few years and Burries ended up being the best guard from this class.
Mikel Brown Jr. has been a bit out of sight due to injury, but he still deserves to be held in high regard. I wrote midseason that he wasn’t the shooter we expected—then he reminded everyone what that looks like.
From January 24th to February 28th, he shot 40.4% from three on high volume, including a 45-point game against NC State where he went 10-for-16 from deep. Beyond the shooting, he might have the best court-mapping ability in the class. His ability to manipulate defenders with his eyes and create passing angles is special.
Kingston Flemings was once firmly in the “PG1” conversation, but that momentum has cooled. Since January 15th, he’s still been productive—16.7 PPG, 5.2 APG, 4.7 RPG—but the questions now center around his shooting profile.
He’s efficient from three, but the volume is low, ranking behind players you wouldn’t expect—including his own teammate, Chris Cenac Jr. That’s where the hesitation lies. Still, his downhill pressure, vision, and defensive activity (3.0 steal percentage) keep him firmly in the mix.
Labaron Philon Jr. is almost a litmus test for how closely you’ve been watching basketball this season. The concerns coming into the year were his frame and finishing. This season, both improved in a real way.
He shot just under 40% from deep on high volume and made a massive jump at the rim—going from the 36th percentile to the 84th percentile in efficiency. His free-throw rate also jumped significantly. The defensive metrics dipped, but context matters—he carried a major offensive load. There’s reason to believe that impact returns in a more balanced role.
Players like Bennett Stirtz and Christian Anderson further reinforce the depth of this position group. Stirtz’s tournament run highlighted both his scoring ability and the difficulty of carrying a full offensive burden, while Anderson stepped into a lead role late in the season and produced across the board.
And that’s really where this class separates itself.
It’s not just that there are good guards—it’s that there are a lot of them, and the gaps between them aren’t always as wide as draft position might suggest. Prospects like Ebuka Okorie and Tyler Tanner highlight that next tier, while upperclassmen such as Braden Smith, Jaden Bradley, Bruce Thornton, Milos Uzan, and Kylan Boswell present viable options as rotational guards.
That creates a different kind of evaluation challenge.
Teams aren’t just deciding who the best guard is—they’re deciding how to value tiers within a position group that is unusually deep. The difference between the #5 guard and the #15 guard might not be nearly as large as the draft suggests.
That’s what defines this class.
Offseason Finding #3: Is This Year the Year of the Returners?
Midseason Update: Not in the Way that I Thought
End-of-Season Takeaway: Good Quality, Limited Control
There is a case to be made that the 2026 NBA Draft Class may have the best crop of freshmen in recent memory. With that, the natural question becomes: what does that mean for the returners?
With the big men and guards already discussed, the returners have supplied a good amount of depth—but they haven’t defined the class.
No returning prospect has impacted the college basketball landscape quite like Yaxel Lendeborg. He ranked second among all college players in BPM this season at 15.3, while posting an assist-to-turnover ratio of 3.1. But what makes Yaxel’s season stand out isn’t the production, but the context.
He unlocked a frontcourt that featured himself, Aday Mara, and Morez Johnson Jr.—a combination that, on paper, shouldn’t have worked as cleanly as it did. His ability to knock down over 37% of his threes on volume created real spacing, allowing that lineup to function at a high level. That kind of scalability is what makes his impact feel different from most returners.
Morez Johnson Jr. has also shown a ton of utility since the January update. Since January 15th, he averaged 12.2 PPG and 7.3 RPG while shooting 58% from the field. But his value extends well beyond the counting numbers.
There’s a blend of power and motor that allows him to defend across the frontcourt, and offensively, he thrives in that “arm’s reach” game—ranking in the 93rd percentile in at-rim efficiency. The shooting is still developing, but there are encouraging signs. He shot over 37% on spot-up threes and over 43% when left open. Pair that with nearly 78% from the free-throw line, and there’s a reasonable pathway to him becoming a reliable floor spacer.
One of the more surprising risers since midseason has been Dailyn Swain. Prior to the January update, Swain was productive but inefficient from deep. Post-update, the efficiency took a real jump—18.8 PPG on 53/40/86 splits.
That jump raises the central question with Swain: what does he actually project to be?
The film shows a player who can get downhill, draw fouls, and finish with craft; Swain is shooting over 63% at the rim. He rebounds well and keeps the ball moving. But the jumper is still the swing skill. The 40% on open catch-and-shoot looks is encouraging, but the sample is small. When contested, he drops back to 33%, which aligns more closely with his off-the-dribble shooting.
If the open shooting holds, he profiles as a strong complementary piece. If not, teams will have to wrestle with where the offensive value comes from in a scaled role.
Allen Graves—technically a returner despite being listed as a redshirt freshman—has built a case as one of the more intriguing analytical profiles in the class. At his size, shooting nearly 41% from three while posting a 5.0 block percentage and a 4.9 steal percentage is rare. Add in strong rebounding and a 2.5 assist-to-turnover ratio, and there’s a lot to work with—though there’s still room for growth.
Juke Harris is another name that probably should have been included earlier. After barely playing last season, he stepped into a lead role at Wake Forest and averaged over 21 PPG. The efficiency (44/33/78) doesn’t fully capture his impact. He was asked to carry a heavy load on a team that didn’t offer much support.
He’s a high-energy athlete with real feel, and his midrange touch (47.8% on far twos) has been a consistent strength. There’s a world where he gets drafted this year, but he’d likely benefit from returning to a situation where he can operate with more balance.
When you add Yaxel and these names to players like Thomas Haugh, Cameron Carr, Joshua Jefferson, Alex Karaban—and the previously discussed guards and bigs—you start to see the shape of this group.
There are a lot of good players here.
But that’s the point.
The returners have added real depth to this class. They’ve filled it out. They’ve made it stronger. But they haven’t taken control of it. The top of the class—and the identity of it—still belongs to the freshmen and the guards.
Offseason Finding #4: Who Are the International Men of Mystery?
Midseason Update: I Still Don’t Know
End-of-Season Takeaway: The “Mystery” Is Gone—The Talent Has Moved
There isn’t another way to say it—NIL has completely changed how international players are evaluated in the draft.
In my January update, I mentioned how players like Neoklis Avdalas, Mario Saint-Supery, and Johann Grunloh have moved to the college ranks, pulling from what we’ve traditionally viewed as the “international” pool. That trend is continuing. Even looking ahead, players like Roko Prkacin are expected to come stateside to compete in follow-on seasons.
With that shift, this class lacks the kind of high-end, traditional international prospects we’ve grown accustomed to—and that absence has, in my opinion, impacted how Karim Lopez is being evaluated.
Most outlets have Lopez slotted in the middle-to-late portions of the first round, but he offers more than he’s typically given credit for providing.
The concerns about his foot speed haven’t really resonated with me. On film, I see a player who can move—someone comfortable operating on the perimeter, capable of initiating offense, and even running pick-and-roll. There’s a real stop-start element to his game that allows him to create separation, and when you factor in his strength at a young age, it becomes even more intriguing.
He’s also a solid decision-maker who can make plays on the move. If that level of offensive versatility is enough to elevate a player like Nate Ament into high draft conversations, it’s fair to question why Lopez is consistently viewed as a tier below.
The production supports the case. He posted a 7.6 offensive rebounding percentage and an 18.7 defensive rebounding percentage, along with a 4.0 block percentage and a 2.3 steal percentage—all while playing in a physical NBL environment. Also, he just turned 19 four days ago.
The swing skill is the shooting, which is fair. But even there, there are reasons for optimism. He shot over 43% on open threes and over 37% on dribble-jumper threes, while maintaining a 73% free throw mark in a professional league.
There’s more here than the current consensus suggests.
After Lopez, though, things thin out quickly.
Sergio de Larrea is a player some evaluators like, and there are real positives—his vision and size stand out—but there are also clear questions. How does he hold up physically? What does his defensive role look like? Unlike some guards who can offset defensive concerns with elite offensive output, de Larrea doesn’t quite have that same margin for error.
Dash Daniels hasn’t developed in the way many hoped. The tools are still there—size, youth, and pedigree—but the production hasn’t followed. His shooting dipped as the season went on, and the late-season stretch raised additional concerns. From January through early March, he shot just 17% from three (on limited volume) and 40% at the rim.
The challenge with Daniels as a “this year” prospect is identifying his current NBA-level skill. There are defensive tools to build on, but offensively, he remains a projection.
An interesting name to monitor—even if he’s not firmly in the 2026 mix—is Luigi Suigo. At 7’3”, with real shooting upside (around 35% from three in a pro league), he fits the mold of where the NBA is trending with bigs.
There’s also some feel here as a passer, even if the assist-to-turnover numbers aren’t fully there yet. The production hasn’t caught up to the tools, which is why there’s been growing noise about him potentially coming stateside—following the same path as other international prospects.
That, ultimately, is the story.
The question coming into the season wasn’t just “who are the international prospects?”—it was whether that pipeline still functions the way it used to.
Right now, it doesn’t.
The talent hasn’t disappeared. It just moved.
Offseason Finding #5: There Are Parallels to the 2023 NBA Draft Class!
Midseason Update: Do We Do Draft Class Comparisons Correctly?
End-of-Season Takeaway: A Truly Unique Class
It’s human nature to compare something new to a known commodity. When diving into the 2026 NBA Draft Class, I initially tried to make sense of it through the lens of the 2023 class. At the time, that felt reasonable.
Victor Wembanyama, Scoot Henderson, Brandon Miller, Amen Thompson, Ausar Thompson, Cason Wallace, and Dereck Lively II: those were known, high-level prospects entering the 2023 cycle, and they’ve since proven to be quality NBA players at minimum.
I made that comparison in October. As the season unfolded, though, I found myself trying to frame this class differently—and even questioning whether we compare draft classes correctly in the first place.
The issue is that most comparisons are made with the benefit of hindsight. We know what those past classes became. We don’t know that yet for this one.
That led me to a different lens—one that isn’t as clean, or as appealing.
The 2008 NBA Draft.
It’s not considered one of the great classes historically, but the pre-draft environment shares some similarities. The early hype around Derrick Rose, Michael Beasley, and O.J. Mayo mirrors, in some ways, the attention placed on AJ Dybantsa, Darryn Peterson, and Cameron Boozer. And like that 2008 class, there’s a broader layer of depth that could ultimately produce a number of quality players—Kevin Love, Brook Lopez, Serge Ibaka, DeAndre Jordan, Goran Dragic, and others.
But even that comparison only goes so far.
At a certain point, trying to neatly fit this class into a past template becomes less useful. What we’re seeing now is a class that is being shaped in real time by forces that didn’t exist in the same way before.
Fifteen of the Top 30 prospects on the No Ceilings Big Board V.6 are freshmen, with six more just outside that range who could easily push into the first round. The concentration of high-level first-year players is unusually strong.
On top of the names already discussed, there’s even more upward pressure within that group. Keaton Wagler has risen up boards despite not being a Top 100 recruit. Nate Ament fits a highly sought-after NBA archetype. Meleek Thomas, once viewed as a lead guard, has grown into one of the best wing prospects in the class. Amari Allen has developed into a promising dribble-pass-shoot forward. Once Koa Peat settled into the season, he looked every bit like the highly-touted recruit many expected.
At the same time, there are quality returners who have added real depth to the class.
So where does that leave things?
The biggest variable is what we haven’t seen yet.
Nearly 2,000 players entered the transfer portal this cycle. Many of those players are also testing the NBA Draft waters. The withdrawal deadline will ultimately shape how much of this class’s perceived depth actually materializes on draft night.
That’s what makes this class difficult to pin down.
The high-end talent is real. The depth is real—but it’s also fluid.
And because of that, comparisons to past classes can only take us so far.
What we can say now is that this class has been one of the more interesting—and more enjoyable—groups to evaluate in recent memory.
Follow me on Twitter: StephenGHoops
Catch me on BlueSky: StephenGHoops
Catch the Draft Sickos show LIVE on the No Ceilings NBA channel: