Then and Now: Stephen Revisits His 1.0 NBA Big Board | 2026 NBA Draft
Stephen Gillaspie empties his notebook on his 2026 NBA Draft Rankings--highlighting how things have changed from his 1.0 Board to his final one of the season.
As we move closer to the 2026 NBA Draft, the evaluation environment starts to change.
Games end. Workouts begin. Measurements, interviews, medicals, background intel, and team conversations begin filling the vacuum left behind by live competition. This is the point in the cycle where boards can start moving rapidly—sometimes because of meaningful information, and sometimes because the draft ecosystem simply becomes louder.
That tension is part of what makes this stage of the process so difficult.
Some prospects genuinely answer questions late in the cycle. Others begin rising because of theoretical upside, private workouts, or momentum generated outside of live game environments. In a class as deep and complicated as this one, separating meaningful evaluation shifts from temporary draft-cycle inflation becomes increasingly important.
Whenever I reach this point in the process, one of the things I like to do is revisit my original board.
Not to victory-lap takes. Not to shame old evaluations. But to study how my thinking evolved over the course of the season.
What changed?
What held up?
Which archetypes became more valuable?
Which concerns became more difficult to ignore?
Which players clarified themselves once roles, competition, and workload stabilized?
The interesting part about revisiting an early board is realizing that not every movement reflects a player getting “better” or “worse.” Sometimes the class around them changes. Sometimes, role scalability becomes clearer. Sometimes postseason environments reveal what actually translates when possessions become more valuable.
This piece is an attempt to track that evolution.
Using my preseason Top 30 as the foundation, I’m revisiting where I started, where I am now, and what I learned throughout the 2026 NBA Draft cycle. Some evaluations strengthened. Some changed entirely. And honestly, there are still a few prospects I’m actively wrestling with as the draft approaches.
That’s part of the process, too.
Let’s revisit the board!
1. Darryn Peterson
Then: 1
Now: 1 (→)
Who Occupied #1 on My 1.0 Board?
Darryn Peterson.
Why I had Darryn Peterson Here Initially:
One of the biggest things that I look for in NBA Draft prospects is how they are built, and how they appear to handle physicality. With Peterson being a bigger guard, I quickly fell in love with his blend of strength, athleticism, and feel. He showed to get very good lift on his jumper, got to the paint often, and, as I wrote in my preseason notes for him, he had “VERY good feel and vision.”
He also showed the potential to develop into a plus-defender. He often defended some of the bigger players on the opposing teams, moving his feet well and getting vertical to contest shots aggressively. He attacked the glass well—even getting after loose balls as one of the best high school players in the country.
Why Darryn Peterson is Here Now:
I know that the following comment could draw a lot of “yeah, buts,” but when Darryn Peterson played, there was not another player in the country that wowed me to the degree that Peterson did. Yeah, he dealt with a cramping issue that people debated the relevance of, but he still played instead of “playing it safe” and shutting it down. One of the aspects of his game that wasn’t showcased to the level it was in high school was the playmaking. Call it an excuse, but I feel like he did exactly what he was asked to do on a not-so-talented Kansas team: score the ball. Only one other starter, Tre White, shot the ball over 35% from deep for the Jayhawks, so Peterson operating with the ball in his hands consistently allowed defenses to really pack the paint.
Peterson showed insane, top-tier shot creation for himself. He was in the 89th percentile operating out of isolation and in the 99th percentile on spotting up. Given how well he handled the ball as the lead guy, I still believe that Peterson can be an excellent on-ball creator for himself and others. His defense was still at a high level despite having stretches of unavailability. He posted a steal and block percentage over 2.2. His length was encouraging in how he was able to scale up as more than a reliable defender in the Big 12. Even his rebounding tracked decently, given how much he was asked to be a wing play finisher.
Despite missing time with an injury, Peterson averaged over 20 PPG and shot over 38% from deep. He was named to the All-Big 12 Second Team, too. If this is a “down” year for Peterson—given all of the obstacles and adversity he has faced—I believe in who Peterson can be as a player.
2. AJ Dybantsa
Then: 3
Now: 2 (↑)
Who Occupied #2 on My 1.0 Board?
Cameron Boozer.
Why I had Cameron Boozer Here Initially:
I wrestled with who I was going to have at #2 coming into the season between AJ Dybantsa and Cameron Boozer. It ultimately came down to what I trusted more coming into the season: Cam’s defense or AJ’s offense.
I felt more confident in Boozer’s defensive ability, given how well he played on that end pre-college. Cam’s offense was easy for me to see translating up, given how much I tend to lean toward physicality and feel. Those aspects appeared to be tilted more towards Cam for me. He showed such body control on his clutches and pump-fakes that I felt confident in his ability to show counters to whatever the defense is looking to throw at him—and I still do feel that way, for what it’s worth.
Boozer’s playmaking was good in high school, but it wasn’t weaponized the same way in high school as compared to what Duke allowed/asked him to do. He did show off some post playmaking and some drive-and-kicks to an extent, but he didn’t show as much pick-and-roll operation—likely due to his sheer size. Of course, he was an excellent rebounder and showcased the outlet passing that continues to garner Kevin Love comparisons.
Defensively, he moved his feet well and was able to stay with his man. He wasn’t a risk-taker as much at the high school level. Instead, he looked to win based on footwork and fundamentals. There was some level of confidence that I had in him being able to guard bigger wings and some forwards as well.
Why AJ Dybantsa is Here Now:
I’m a sucker for in-season improvements and, one could argue, that AJ’s was the most impressive and the most important. Given the injury to Richie Saunders, Dybantsa had to shoulder so much of a load for BYU. For him to shoot 51% from the floor, given the roster construction, Dybantsa proved that he could get to his spots despite facing some front-loaded defenses and still finish.
At his size, Dybantsa looks every bit of the prototypical big wing initiator that every NBA team would covet. He spent 73% of his offensive possessions operating out of the pick-and-roll. His length and strength allowed him to handle the contact that defenses would show, looking to move him off his spots. He could stop and pop, finishing over the top of his man. Once he got to the rim, he finished with such effectiveness. Again, being able to handle physicality is a big deal for me. Dybantsa scoring 63% at the rim had him ranked in the 71st percentile. He had 21 dunks in the halfcourt too—showcasing his athleticism.
The things that are holding me back from having him at #1 are how much the defense just didn’t translate, and how messy the decision-making can tend to be for him. In his defense (and why I have him second), the defense may have taken a bit of a blow based on how much he had to do for his team. The passing was generally fine, but can he be an engine for a team? I’m not so sure of that. With that being the case, why have him over someone who showcased high-level playmaking in high school with such little separation in high school for me?
3. Caleb Wilson
Then: 4
Now: 3 (↑)
Who Occupied #3 on My 1.0 Board?
AJ Dybantsa.
Why I had AJ Dybantsa Here Initially:
He looked like he was made in an NBA lab. His intersection of size and skill was so infatuating coming out of high school that it was hard for me to list him as the third prospect in a preseason Big Three. His offense was some of the most polished that you would want to see from a high school prospect. The way that he got to the basket was very mature in high school—showing polish on his rip-throughs, euro steps, hops steps, etc. His smooth handle and ability to get to his shot off of a live dribble set him apart from most of the prospects that were coming into this cycle, but he also showed the ability to make sharp cuts to the rim and compete on the glass.
Looking back at my notes that I had on AJ, I did like the passing reads that he tried to pull off, but I had a strong feeling his turnovers would be a problem. He often tried to throw jump passes once he wasn’t able to get to his first read. He would also get additional pressure when defenses would help off and make digs at his dribble. He did show that he was capable of making quick decisions, but those reads mostly came off of same-side kickouts or escape passes to a teammate who is in position next to him. His ability to create for others was something that I was concerned with.
The defense was another area of AJ’s game that I was curious about. There were moments in FIBA play and other exhibition settings where his length and athleticism could allow him to be impactful on that end. In my offseason notes, I did note that his hands were quick enough to force events when he was in position. On the other side of things, I wasn’t sold on his recovery tools or his closing speed on closeouts. The last defensive note I had on him was “would really need him to buy into the fundamentals on defense a lot more for his NBA projection to be cleaner.”
Why Caleb Wilson is Here Now:
Caleb Wilson ended up here for me for a number of reasons. For one, the athleticism and length are quite special. Of the Top 4 in this class, Caleb has a unique case to have the most NBA-ready tools of the group. That may be low-hanging fruit to some—perhaps lazy scouting or an aesthetic bias—but that sort of thing matters. The NBA comes down to millimeters and fractions of seconds, so having the ability to influence those moments should be valued to some degree.
Caleb showed a lot of scoring during the course of the season. People may hand-wave this, but he was one of the best and most consistent dunkers of the season. Even in the halfcourt, Wilson had 37 dunks. This is the highest percentage shot a player can create, and he did it on a high level of regularity. But Caleb wasn’t just simply one of the best at-rim finishers in the country—he made a living at hitting fade-away middies at a high clip. He shot over 44% on his far two-pointers on over 100 attempts. While Caleb hasn’t shown to be a knock-down shooter from deep, there are enough indicators here that would sway me to try to develop that part of his game.
On defense, Caleb has been the subject of some public scrutiny. He’s not perfect, and there is some polish required on that end, but Wilson has all of the tools required. He also showed very promising moments defensively, too. His block and steal percentages were very solid, as were his stocks generated to fouls committed numbers. Speaking of promising, the passing numbers suggest that there is an underlying skill set waiting to be developed.
To me, the lack of discussion on Wilson’s feel was pretty disappointing this season. He showed great promise in those grab-and-go transition possessions—balancing his rim pressure while also keeping his head up to make a play for others. In the halfcourt, Caleb was a great stationary passer, finding teammates from the perimeter and when in the mid-post or on the block.
Admittedly, there is a world where Wilson is the next “potential” prospect that struggles to live up to his draft spot. But I genuinely feel that will solely be based on his jumper for the most part—or if he doesn’t get any better at all on defense. But everything that has reached my ears suggests that Caleb is exactly the sort of young man you bet on. Think about where UNC was last season, compared to when we saw him play for the Heels this season. Night and day. Considering that—along with the fact that Caleb beat Cameron Boozer and Darryn Peterson when they went head-to-head—there is plenty of reason to buy into the production and promise of Caleb.
4. Cameron Boozer
Then: 2
Now: 4 (↓)
Who Occupied #4 on My 1.0 Board?
Caleb Wilson.
Why I had Caleb Wilson Here Initially:
Caleb took a little bit of time to grow on me. Even when it became clear that he was above the other prospects in this class, I still didn’t believe in him truly challenging AJ Dybantsa, Darryn Peterson, or Cameron Boozer. Funnily enough, I didn’t buy Caleb’s moves translating to him getting to the rim in high school. I questioned his wiggle when using Euros and rip-throughs. He didn’t feel like he had the best balance, and he couldn’t finish when he was knocked off his line. I chalked that up to core strength. Of course, I didn’t like his shot in high school. His grouping was erratic, and it felt like he didn’t release his shot until he was on his way down.
BUT! His effort was always present. He was always moving, giving multiple efforts on plays that allowed him or his teammates another crack at points. I even wrote that he had “some flashes of feel—would love it to be more consistent.” I even noted how it felt like he played out of position, too. Still, his ground coverage and tools were obvious on film, which still showed true while at North Carolina.
Why Cameron Boozer is Here Now:
Here is where some people will come for me. Look, I don’t hate Cameron Boozer because I have him fourth. This class is very talented at the top, and someone had to be at this spot. I could have been in line with most others and put Caleb Wilson here because that’s where you see him in most places. But I can’t roll that way anymore.
I came into the year with Cam as the second-highest prospect on my board. I loved his tape in high school and felt he had many tools to be in contention for the #1 pick in my eyes, and he still had a fantastic season. I understand that, analytically, Cameron Boozer had one of the best seasons in BartTorvik history. And—to be clear—Cam impressed me in a number of areas.
Cam is so strong. He is a bully who can attract contact and finish through it. He finished with 32 And-Ones on the year, and had a free-throw rate of 53.6. One thing that the playoffs have shown is that physicality is important, and you have to draw and initiate contact. Boozer is also a tremendous rebounder. He proved that on both sides of the glass. That showed true particularly on the offensive glass, where he ranked in the 85th percentile on putbacks. Boozer also showed a high degree of feel as a playmaker. His passing out of the post was one of the most bankable skills in the class, as well as his outlet passing.
Perhaps the skill that I found to be most impressive was his floor spacing. I did not expect him to shoot nearly 40% from deep on 6.5 attempts per 100 possessions. Even off the bounce, Boozer hit nearly 37% from deep. It’s because of his shooting that I buy into the rest of Cam’s game.
The reason I worry about Cam comes down to his defense. If he were a point guard, I wouldn’t care as much, but there are some concerns with him being able to scale up and play center in the league. He doesn’t get vertical in game play well enough to challenge the great length in the NBA. His footwork also didn’t translate to the college ranks the way I anticipated. I do worry about his defensive ability in open space. This places Cam in a weird position type, where he is effectively a one-position player. I also don’t buy him as someone who can operate with the ball in his hands on the perimeter—at least from Day One.
That being said, I still like him a great deal. I have him and Caleb Wilson in a tier of their own, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he goes ahead of Caleb. I just don’t see Cam in the sort of Teflon-tier as others.
5. Darius Acuff Jr.
Then: 18
Now: 5 (↑)
Who Occupied #5 on My 1.0 Board?
Nikolas Khamenia.
Why Darius Acuff Jr. is Here Now:
It may be hard to believe, but I was not a big Darius Acuff Jr. guy coming into the season. I’ll break that down further a bit later.
I know that people are going to knock Acuff for being one of the shorter guards in the class, but he is a very functional size, and he has a strong build. There are other guards in the class who are taller, but are simply not built for day one minutes in the league—especially in the playoffs. On top of solid measurements (third-highest wingspan among top guards—behind Mikel Brown Jr. and Ebuka Okorie), Darius answered a ton of questions I personally had for him.
Could he shoot? He shot 44% from deep on 9.0 attempts per 100 possessions. He shot 60% from deep on open threes, 43.4% when guarded, and 38.2% off of the bounce. That is an absolute must for any guard.
Could he pass effectively? He ranked 50th in all of college basketball in Assist-to-Turnover ratio. Not only that, but he led the SEC in assists on top of scoring. Darius played a good amount of his possessions running pick-and-roll sets. In fact, he ranked in the 89th percentile in time spent operating out of that set. He was also very capable of getting to his shot without the screen. This was because of his timing, anticipation, strength, and speed.
I get there are concerns with him defensively, but I genuinely think some of that was a combination of what was asked of him and application. I don’t believe that Darius Acuff Jr. will be the proverbial traffic cone over the course of his career based on his tools and strength. Given how prolific he’s proven to be as a scorer, shooter, and passer, I think an NBA team can get him to be acceptable on that end.
6. Mikel Brown Jr.
Then: 11
Now: 6 (↑)
Who Occupied #6 on My 1.0 Board?
Braylon Mullins.
Why Mikel Brown Jr. is Here Now:
I was hesitant to believe that Mikel Brown Jr. was going to be all of the things people believed he was going to be. For one, I’ve seen Brown in person a few times, and he just didn’t impress me much. More on that later.
Mikel’s season felt like it was a tale of two halves in a sense. Prior to the back injury he sustained, we saw Mikel flourish as a passer and as someone who could get to the rim, but his jumper was very lacking. That was something I took note of in my offseason preparation with him. In some exhibition play, he did show some shot consistency, but in his high school seasons, the shot wasn’t always there. For being slightly skinny, the lack of a jumper was concerning.
Then came the back injury.
After he came back and played in a back brace, Mikel couldn’t miss from deep. He had some of his best games of the year.
In terms of skill, there may not be a more imaginative playmaker in the class—that includes the players at the top. He is a “joy stick” player, meaning he has bend, lean, and wiggle. He is just one of the best movers. Given that Mikel showed a lot of growth as an overall scorer, there is real upside here.
The biggest question is: when will he finally grow into that frame? In all seriousness, he may not be done growing. That makes it hard for him to put on meaningful weight. He did weigh in at 190 pounds, which was an encouraging measurement. Now he just needs to improve the defensive consistency and rebounding, which should come relatively easily.
7. Brayden Burries
Then: 21
Now: 7 (↑)
Who Occupied #7 on My 1.0 Board?
Koa Peat.
Why Brayden Burries is Here Now:
What’s funny about Burries rising up my board was how much I liked him coming into the season. For a guard, I loved how powerfully built he was, even in high school. Not only was he powerfully built, but he also showed a high degree of shiftiness and suddenness. I was curious to see how Burries would fare playing on a deep team with legit championship aspirations.
People may not realize this even after the season has ended, but Brayden led the Wildcats in points scored. His blend of power, acceleration, and control allowed him to be a true, three-level scorer. He shot 39.1% from deep on 8.6 attempts per 100 possessions. Burries also shot 45% on his far two-pointers on 109 attempts, all while ranking in the 73rd Percentile in at-rim finishing. Burries routinely displayed a sense of maturity—shifting gears to catch the defense off guard, and keeping his man at a disadvantage once he established an advantage on a live dribble. He showed he could play off of another talented guard in Jaden Bradley, shooting 39% on catch-and-shoot looks. This well-rounded offensive package, with his level of strength and athleticism, has seen him creep up boards—especially in light of the NBA playoffs.
Brayden complements his well-rounded offense with some pretty clean defensive skills. He was upside down in terms of stocks (steals and blocks) to the number of fouls he committed, but he proved to be a solid and effective defender in his lone season of college. He can guard his man with his chest and maintain his position.
The biggest question with Burries revolves around how much you can put on his shoulders. He’s good enough to attack defenses with the ball in his hands, but can he be high usage and create for others? I think that is where one could have some hesitation. Burries feels more suited to play off of other primary guys, but how much of that is because of the role he had to play on a deep team? I’m inclined to believe there is a higher ceiling than what we’re being led to believe.
8. Keaton Wagler
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 8 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #8 on My 1.0 Board?
Bennett Stirtz.
Why Keaton Wagler is Here Now:
No one knew that Keaton Wagler was capable of the sort of season he had. In terms of high-major offers, Wagler—the Kansas Gatorade Player of the Year—chose Illinois over Minnesota, and he excelled early for the team.
Wagler got off to a hot start for the team, in large part because of how he could impact games. He showed a good knack for attacking the glass throughout the season. He also had games where he would lead his team in assists. Once Kylan Boswell was out with injury, Keaton was given the keys to organize and orchestrate his Illinois squad. The biggest thing that stands out to me with Keaton on offense is how smooth and natural of a decision-maker he is. He plays the game under control and hardly ever feels rushed. Despite being a little slight of frame, he does get to the rim a decent bit, and he competes on the glass.
The obvious area where Keaton dominates is as a floor spacer. He shot just a smidge under 40% from deep on 10.7 attempts per 100 possessions. And that is where he gets a lot of insulation to his draft stock; there is a lot of “worst case scenario, he is a good shooter” talk out there. But, to that point, I don’t think there is a lot of questioning: “What if that’s all he is?"
Wagler isn’t the strongest build, nor is he crazy athletic. He weighed in under 190 pounds—less than Meleek Thomas, and many question his ability to handle physicality. Yes, Wagler is 6’5” barefoot, but he also has a wingspan of just +1.25 inches. He didn’t get to the rim a whole heck of a lot relative to his peers—same percentage as Darius Acuff Jr., but finished worse than Darius. People may say: “Well, he doesn’t shy away from contact.” That may be true, but there is a difference in initiating and actually handling contact compared to not shying away from it. That’s why people say the latter, because they can’t say the former, or they would. Also, how does that physicality deficit impact him defensively? We can point to positional size and length, but if he cannot physically hold up, the length is a moot point.
Even with the physical concerns of Keaton, the way he thinks and feels the game is at a good level—and that’s why I still hold him in a decent regard, just not as high as some others.
9. Aday Mara
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 9 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #9 on My 1.0 Board?
Shon Abaev.
Why Aday Mara is Here Now:
Aday Mara went from being a prospect of promise, to a prospect of perpetuity, to a prospect of production throughout his college career. This is likely a shared sentiment, but I had my doubts on how Michigan would make Yaxel, Morez, and Mara work. Mara’s time at UCLA led me to believe that this once-heralded Spaniard was just big for the sake of being big. Michigan built up his stock in just one season.
Mara’s enormity is just the start. One thing that I look for in big men now is how they function in their decision-making. Aday is very gifted as a big man with passing feel. He would work well in the NBA in handoffs, but also on hit-aheads in transition looks. Mara also rebounds well—especially on the offensive ends. He projects to provide high-percentage second-chance plays, whether he gathers and finishes, or kicks the ball out to an open teammate. He protects the rim well, too. His 7’6” wingspan gives him the ability to protect the paint, but he showed off some surprisingly good feet in open space. Not that I would draft him to do this, but Mara has flirted with spacing the floor from distance—which would give him even more utility on offense.
The questions with Mara are really centered around his mobility. While I have been quite high on his footwork, he will likely get bested by NBA-level athletes, despite having possessions when he stopped players like Labaron Philon in the open court. There are also going to be concerns about how long of stretches he can go for a team. He is a liability from the free-throw line and has been for the majority of his college career.
If he is exclusively a drop big man, then there are limitations as to the lineups he can be featured in.
10. Morez Johnson Jr.
Then: 71
Now: 10 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #10 on My 1.0 Board?
Tounde Yessoufou.
Why Morez Johnson Jr. is Here Now:
It was a gradual appreciation of what Morez Johnson does on a night-to-night basis that led to him climbing up my board. Playing next to Yaxel Lendeborg meant Morez took on some of the more ugly aspects of the game. But, in the grime, he shone.
Morez crashes the glass with the best of them—even on a team with Aday Mara and Yax, Johnson Jr. was awesome on the offensive glass in particular. His powerful base allowed him to work his way into position to fend off others, while his verticality, ball tracking ability, and sheer force allowed him to come down with second-chance opportunities. Morez graded out in the 71st percentile on putbacks, and that is due to his ability to give multiple efforts. His second jump is rivaled by few…if any. That same motor and strength show when he rolls to the basket or when he establishes position on the block. His touch in traffic also went largely underrated—likely because of the way he bangs in traffic.
Not that I’m drafting him because of this, but a team should absolutely invest in finding out how good Johnson’s shooting touch can ultimately be. He was in the 74th percentile in non-dunk finishes, he shot over 78% from the free-throw line, and he shot over 34% from deep. While the shooting touches exists, there is no guarantee that he’ll be reliable there, so I’m not putting all of my eggs in that basket. But, with the way that he defends, it’s not an essential part of his development. Johnson has a strong case to be the best frontcourt defender in the class. At his size, he can scale up to defend bigger players, but he also does a great job of defending in space on bigger wings and forwards.
There feels like some sort of artificial cap is applied to Morez, because he isn’t the type of player to just go and get his buckets. He’ll need to be set up by someone else, but that doesn’t mean that he doesn’t have value. It’s just more likely a team that has an established pecking order will value him more than a rebuilding team.
11. Ebuka Okorie
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 11 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #13 on My 1.0 Board?
Mikel Brown Jr.
Why Ebuka Okorie is Here Now:
I’m choosing not to put an artificial cap on Ebuka Okorie. It feels like Okorie “can only go so high” because of the depth of this position, plus some of the other guards, like Philon, Stirtz, and Anderson, came into the cycle with a certain amount of equity. With Ebuka, enough people like his talent, but the criticisms feel pretty generic to me. There doesn’t seem to be much to dislike with his offensive tape—mostly just two metrics: the finishing and passing numbers.
His school’s context has much to do with that, in my humble opinion. Yes, he shot 54% at the rim, but so did Keaton Wagler. Kingston Flemings was just 1% higher. Both of those players are considered Top 10 guards by most. Keaston Wagler had an Assist Percentage of 23.2. Okorie had an Assist Percentage of 23.9. The areas of concern for Okorie aren’t unique to him. Among all of the top guards in this class, it’s hard to make a case for anyone who had more of a burden in relation to the talent around him than Okorie. Less than 19% of his shots were assisted, which speaks to the self-creation he has—even in a congested environment.
His tape shows the level of passing feel he has as a prospect—with high capability to pass people open, hit the roller in stride, find the man in the dunker spot with a dump-off, or whip the ball to a teammate two passes away. His handle and length give him access to unique passes that just weren’t actualized because of the surrounding talent. And, even with all of that, Okorie had a very good season on offense. Defensively, I know it’s not going to be his strong suit, but he has shown the ability to be impactful on that end. With a Steal Percentage of 2.7, and a Block Percentage of 1.0, Okorie had 58 stocks to just 43 fouls committed. He has the speed to rotate over to the next man and has the length to contest and bother shots. He has no qualms about coming over from the weak side to challenge drives with digs and bother the shot.
I know there are questions about the shot—and some other “things” that are vaguely referenced—but Okorie’s one year of production (that was largely self-generated) and high upside are just waiting for a team to strike.
12. Yaxel Lendeborg
Then: 26
Now: 12 (↑)
Who Occupied #12 on My 1.0 Board?
Cayden Boozer.
Why Yaxel Lendeborg is Here Now:
Yaxel Lendeborg plays at a premium position and has all the length and skill that you could ask for to add to an established team. He has shown over the past two seasons that there is going to be some form of floor spacing he offers—shooting over over 36% from three on varying levels of volume. He’s been a good free-throw shooter over the past three seasons, and he has connected on 35.9% or better on his far two-pointers over that same stretch. This bodes well for him.
Beyond that, Yaxel is adept at scoring on the ball. He’s proven this season that he can operate with the ball in his hands on the perimeter and against high-level competition on a consistent basis. His decision-making was on par with the top guards in this class. Even on the move, Lendeborg was able to find open teammates, which is probably his most important development. While his rebounding percentages took a hit, almost everyone would agree that this is because of the frontcourt he was a part of—not because of anything he couldn’t do.
Proving to be a three-level scorer—on and off the ball—Lendeborg’s defensive ability was quite impressive. Sure, he benefited from Morez taking on the tougher assignment. Yeah, he could be a little more aggressive in making plays on the ball with Mara protecting the rim. But, Yaxel still showed smart, quick hands to strip the ball from his man. His strength, length, and athleticism allowed Yax to swat the ball when he was on his assignment, or making savvy rotations.
I’m not an ageist—but we’ve seen that, time and again, NBA teams just aren’t in a hurry to take someone as old as Lendeborg as high as some people have him ranked. He does benefit from some positional scarcity—with only a few players of his size and skill likely to be available outside the Top 5.
13. Kingston Flemings
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 13 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #13 on My 1.0 Board?
Chris Cenac Jr.
Why Kingston Flemings is Here Now:
Flemings has been vaunted as the best two-way guard in a class that has been shaped due to the depth of the position. Kingston has done a great job of showing how well he can perform when on the ball. His speed has impressed me as his season progressed. There is a healthy amount of burst and some solid deceleration. His ability to stop on a dime and pull up for the mid-range shot has been awesome. While some of the other top guards in the class have finished at the rim at a high clip, Flemings has been respectable in his own right. He doesn’t draw fouls as much as some of his peers in that regard, but that isn’t anything that I would say he can’t improve.
His passing has been very good this season. While it may not be at the top of highlight reels, Kingston’s passing is effective. He is adept at drawing additional attention, and finding his guys when they’re open. His zoom and even his jump passes are pretty solid, and give him a special quailty to his offense.
Defensively, Flemings uses all of his natural gifts—as well as his mind—to stay a step ahead of his assignment. Obviously, his listed height and wingspan are going to draw some skepticism—and, I’ll admit, I have grown a little skeptical in my belief about just how impactful he can be on that end of the floor. Yes, he did have 68 stocks in college. He did have a healthy Steal Percentage of 3.0 and a Block Percentage of 1.3. But, even in my watching of him at Houston, there were several times when players did attack him and converted over him. For a guard of his size and measurables, Kingston will have to be absolutely on as a defender all of the time, and he will have to be better than the 31.3% he shot on his dribble-jumper threes.
14. Jayden Quaintance
Then: 9
Now: 14 (↓)
Who Occupied #14 on My 1.0 Board?
Dame Sarr.
Why Jayden Quaintance is Here Now:
Quaintance is such a peculiar prospect to rank this season, and there are a few reasons as to why. For one, he didn’t really play. When he did play, he had one awesome performance and a few flashes to lean on a little bit. The second thing to consider is how differently he was used this season. Last year at Arizona State, JQ was able to showcase some playmaking flashes and operate in different areas of the floor. At Kentucky, he was heavily used as a play finisher—which is funny, as Coach Mark Pope has shown a fondness of using decision-making big men. The last thing that makes figuring Jayden’s stock out is positional scarcity. He came into the season largely considered the big man to beat out. Even with the bounce back of Aday Mara and the ascension of Morez Johnson Jr., Quaintance is still considered one of the better big men in the 2026 NBA Draft Class.
There have been videos of Quaintance dunking in an open gym surface over the past month, but it appears that he isn’t comfortable with landing on it just yet. But, are we reacting too negatively to the fact that he is recovering? Feels natural that he is still working on gaining strength and confidence in his leg, right?
When he has been right, Quaintance has been a defensive force. Even in an adversarial season, he posted a Block Percentage of 5.0, and a Steal Percentage of 1.7. He even rebounded well. Offensively, he showed tremendous physicality and the ability to play through contact. His twitch is legitimately freakish. Whether it’s coming off a stand-still or a second jump, JQ’s leaping ability is unrivaled in this class. There are touch concerns, and he isn’t the biggest guy. Also how often can we expect him to miss time now? Those factors are at work against him, but he still has too much in his favor to fall outside the lottery in my opinion.
15. Labaron Philon
Then: 22
Now: 15 (↑)
Who Occupied #15 on My 1.0 Board?
Jayden Quaintance
Why Labaron Philon is Here Now:
Labaron Philon is one of the few people in this class who has taken a hit because of the influx of guards in this class—and it’s not because he’s done anything negative.
Philon is one of the better guards who can handle the ball under pressure. He has shown in a high usage role, that he can be counted on to score at multiple levels. Despite being a little slight of frame, Philon ranked in the 84th percentile in at-rim efficiency—shooting over 66% at the basket. He also got there at a decent volume, ranking in the 40th percentile in at-rim frequency. He did a fantastic job of showing that the shooting stretch he was on to close out last season was not a fluke. He shot just a hair under 38% on 103 off-the-dribble threes.
Labaron ranked in the 98th percentile in time spent running the pick-and-roll and ranked in the 94th percentile scoring out of those sets. His ability to keep the ball on a string and snake his way into his spots has drawn a lot of acclaim, drawing comparisons to Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. I don’t view him quite at that level, but it’s clear that he can run high-efficiency offense at a breakneck pace.
As a passer, he showed such an ability to make slick reads on the move—dictating pace that created passing windows that found his teammates in stride and in position to score. He can find his guys despite playing in congestion because of his patience and consistency in keeping his dribble alive.
He is slim. And one of the bigger differences between SGA playing the way he does, and someone like Labaron, is that he is 6’2.5”, and he weighs just 176 pounds. I get the knee-jerk reaction into buying the things that he’s shown he can do in college, but those things do matter. They do show up in the poor rebounding numbers and in his defensive consistency. There is something to be said about the fact that he was impactful as a freshman defender, but if he isn’t heavily used on-ball, he is a 176-pound, one-position defender.
16. Karim Lopez
Then: 25
Now: 16 (↑)
Who Occupied #16 on My 1.0 Board?
Nate Ament.
Why Karim Lopez is Here Now:
Lopez’s strength and physicality are going to draw a substantial amount of eye rolls and had waves—it is what it is. But, if you can’t see the floor, you can’t:
Showcase your other skills
Improve in your areas of concerns
Even if you can watch the 2026 NBA Conference Finals and Finals outright, and still want to downplay Lopez’s frame, there is still plenty to like. Lopez has shown the ability to hit open threes. Sure, the motion may not be as picturesque as you would like, but if it falls, it falls. He often gets criticized for his athleticism, but Karim can regularly finish above the rim—even in the halfcourt, where he has 13 dunks in the congested and aggressively physical NBL.
As a decision-maker, Karim took pretty good care of the ball—particularly if he is slotted to play the Four, like many are assuming. I’m quite bullish on his handle, too. Karim got to his spots on a consistent basis. I think the aesthetics of him doing so are heavily predicated on the style of play of the league he plays in.
The biggest area of concern for Karim is going to be the shot. And, like I touched on, there are several indicators that suggest he can be quite respectable from deep: 43.2% when open, 37.5% off the bounce, 72.3% from the free throw line, ranked in the 88th percentile on his runners, and just under 59% at the rim on his non-dunk finishes.
He has work to do on defense, but he is young and defended in a unique context. It’s quite difficult to one-for-one that end of the court in the NBL and project that to the NBA. You’d have to buy in the tools and the work ethic of the guy. I do.
17. Dailyn Swain
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 17 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #17 on My 1.0 Board?
Dwayne Aristode.
Why Dailyn Swain is Here Now:
The biggest thing that Swain did for his NBA perception this year is that he played in a completely new context than what we saw at Xavier. After a couple of seasons as a more off-ball, 3-and-D role, Swain followed Sean Miller to the Longhorns and took on a much larger role than he ever had in college. Analytically, Dailyn put up one of the better seasons ever while playing out of isolation—ranking in the 95th percentile on those plays.
I sort of feel like the emphasis of this aspect of his game being magnified did a disservice to the season he had. Swain rebounded the ball incredibly well. He showed a huge leap in his playmaking. Was it perfect? No. Should he be a team’s #1 option? Probably not. But having size and ball-handling is extremely important and desirable. Drawing contact and finishing through it is also helpful. Swain’s athleticism is pretty solid, too, and I felt that went under many people’s radar. I loved his feel for when to slow down, speed up, get into a Eurostep, or rip through. He could play with pace, too.
As a shooter, Dailyn has work to do. BUT, there were reasons to think that he could be a decent floor spacer. He was 35.7% on his catch-and-shoot looks. This is going to be the swing skill for the swing man. If he can’t shoot, it feels like the rest of his offensive game has to be nearly-perfect.
Dailyn’s defense was better in his previous place of play at Xavier. This reminds me so much of how Jaylen Tyson looked when he transferred from Texas Tech to California. Even though Swain did take somewhat of a step back on defense, he was still respectable considering his usage.
18. Cameron Carr
Then: 46
Now: 18 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #18 on My 1.0 Board?
Darius Acuff Jr.
Why Cameron Carr is Here Now:
Cameron Carr was supposed to have been this good for a few years. Perhaps the Tennessee fit stunted him, but Carr took a substantial leap in terms of his production and his perception. The scout starts with his shooting. While having a condor-like wingspan, Carr hit almost 38% from deep on 10.6 attempts per 100 possessions. He was over 80% from the free-throw line, and shot almost 48% on his long twos. With his length and the lift he gets on his shots, he proved to be one of the best tough-shot makers in all of college basketball.
While he is one of the best shooting prospects in this class, Cameron is also a very good athlete. Of all available draft prospects, Carr had the second-best standing and max vertical at the combine. He also placed second in the lane agility time and ninth in the shuttle run. That shows in the film, as he was a freakish oop option for Baylor, and he also recorded a 3.9 Block Percentage. To put that into perspective, Cam Boozer had a Block Percentage of 2.2 as a frontcourt player. Carr’s athleticism, combined with his shooting touch, makes him an interesting proposition.
What makes me more hesitant is—you guessed it—the frame. Carr weighed in at 184 pounds. He’s always been a thinner player, and his weight was the eighth-lowest of all Draft Combine participants—less than players like Darius Acuff Jr., Keaton Wagler, Bennett Stirtz, and Meleek Thomas. The weight concerns do show in some of his rebounding metrics—as well as his free-throw rate. He’s also likely going to be capped as a connective passer at best. His athleticism might be enough to make up for the strength deficit, but I’m worried that his shooting could be negated by his ability to handle physicality.
19. Hannes Steinbach
Then: 23
Now: 19 (↑)
Who Occupied #19 on My 1.0 Board?
Thomas Haugh.
Why Hannes Steinbach is Here Now:
Hannes is one of the more interesting prospects to rank within this class—and in terms of how he projects into the NBA. The rebounding with him is the elite skill that he brings to the table, as it was projected it would be. Hannes is a very strong player, with wide shoulders and a stout base that allows him to carve lanes out to crash the boars on both sides of the ball. A lot of his points came from cleaning up the offensive glass, as he ranked in the 82nd percentile in the percentage of his shots coming off putbacks. He converted well there, connecting on nearly 64% of his putback attempts.
His strength and footwork in the paint allow him to score effectively, whether he operated as the dive man, whether he posted up, or whether he cut and made sharp moves to the basket. While he didn’t shoot overly well from deep, he did hit almost 45% from his far two-pointers. He knocked down almost 76% from the free-throw line. His touch around the basket on his non-dunk looks is great. The fact that he took threes comfortably is a promising sign in and of itself.
Defensively, the footwork isn’t bad, to be honest. It’s just that he doesn’t have outlandish tools, nor is he an above-the-rim defender. This puts some sort of a cap on him on that end—which is hard to build a frontcourt around. And, while there are plenty of good things going for Steinbach, the decision-making isn’t where you want it to be. It isn’t bad—and maybe his team context wasn’t the best place for him to showcase those skills—but he hasn’t shown enough to feel like he can be an initiator on offense. That is what is separating him from being more comparable to a Domantas Sabonis or an Alperen Sengun.
20. Bennett Stirtz
Then: 8
Now: 20 (↓)
Who Occupied #20 on My 1.0 Board?
Meleek Thomas.
Why Bennett Stirtz is Here Now:
Bennett Stirtz is another player who has been a casualty of the swell of younger guards that have taken over the 2026 NBA Draft Class. Stirtz came into the season riding the high of helping Drake reach the postseason, and followed his coach to Iowa. While Bennett did transfer up, the path to improvement was somewhat stunted. Did we really see more than what we already thought of Stirtz?
From his junior year at Drake to his senior season at Iowa, Bennett’s usage, Effective Field Goal percentages, and True Shooting percentages were nearly identical. His assist-to-turnover ratios, block percentages, and number of dunks were pretty close between both years. What did go down was his three-point percentage, but that came on a significant increase in his volume. It looks like Stirtz’s shot is going to be a weapon for him as an ancillary player, which is a role we haven’t really seen from him. His playmaking feel and vision also appear to be a safe bet.
He has pretty good positional length, which he uses to make good passing reads when he is on the move. He also can use that—in conjunction with his mind—to make smart plays on the ball. The biggest concern that one may have is how much he can help on the ball. Stirtz is a good shooter away from the ball—where he shot over 49% on his catch-and-shoot threes. On his drives, he shot under 38% from the floor. On his three-pointers off the bounce, he shot just over 31% on very high volume.
21. Zuby Ejiofor
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 21 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #21 on My 1.0 Board?
Brayden Burries.
Why Zuby Ejiofor is Here Now:
Zuby’s rise on my board took a long, winding road. For one, he is an undersized big man. Normally, for that archetype to work, there have to be some real signs of shooting touch. I’m not in the circle of those who believe that Ejiofor will be a solid shooter—but I don’t think that will necessarily matter. On offense, he has shown to be a proficient passer. He runs the floor well, he is quite strong and should function well in the pick-and-roll, and he cleans up the glass with second-chance opportunities.
Defensively, Ejiofor offers a ton. He moves well in the open floor and is strong enough to scale across the frontcourt. His 7’2” wingspan is well-utilized, as he can make awesome rotations to reject shots—or just outright play vertical on his man. Even if he isn’t making contact with the ball, Zuby is challenging and contesting shooters at a good clip. With the motor always being on, the fact that he has a pathway to be a functional decision-maker and play finisher on offense, Ejiofor’s superpower on defense gives him rotational utility in different schemes. This gives him a level of safety that I didn’t give much attention to until far later into the cycle.
22. Tarris Reed Jr.
Then: 36
Now: 22 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #22 on My 1.0 Board?
Labaron Philon.
Why Tarris Reed Jr. is Here Now:
It feels like people are quick to move off of big men who can’t shoot or handle the ball along the perimeter, but there is still value to be had in players who can score and stop players from scoring. That’s something that Tarris Reed Jr. brings to a team. While he is powerfully built, Tarris moves incredibly well. He can do very well in show-and-recover situations and can give multiple efforts on a single play. His movement also allows him to make savvy rotations to reject would-be points. His strength is just as apparent, as Reed grades out well as a rebounder on both sides of the ball. Not to mention that Reed sets a heck of a screen.
Tarris also showcased some good decision-making for his position, too. Playing for Coach Hurley at UConn, Reed was put in positions to find his teammates on the move in stride. This bodes well for Reed to operate out of DHOs—even rejecting handoffs, making a couple of dribbles, and finding the next man. This should help him provide an impact on offense despite not having an apparent, projectable jump shot. Reed’s role as a play finisher—and a play extended at his highest of highs—does still have utility in the NBA, and is amplified by his day one-ready strength.
23. Allen Graves
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 23 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #23 on My 1.0 Board?
Hannes Steinbach.
Why Allen Graves is Here Now:
I stated several months back that Allen Graves is the middle-class man’s Cameron Boozer. That sentiment has swelled to the point where it seems like Graves will be selected near the lottery—if not in it. Graves’ game lights up spreadsheets as well as anyone else in this class, and that’s happened while coming off the bench. One of the things that makes Allen an intriguing prospect is his shooting at his size. On almost seven three-point attempts per 100 possessions, he shot nearly 41%. That’s while shooting 75% from the free-throw line, and almost 45% from long two-point range. Though on low usage, Graves proved to be a sound decision-maker. That didn’t come at a high clip while off of the bounce, but there could be some stationary playmaking—or DHO usage—that he could offer.
There are a lot of interesting underlying metrics that leave me a little skeptical. Graves’ stock numbers were pretty incredible at face value. As the kids say, those numbers may have been a little “farmed,” because teams continued to go at him despite him making plays on the ball. He was under water in terms of stocks forced to fouls committed, as he had 96 stocks while committing 106 fouls. A lot of those defensive concerns are based on his athleticism. Graves had the third-slowest lane agility time, the third-slowest shuttle run, and the fifth-slowest three-quarter sprint. He was in the bottom ten in the standing vert and tied for 15th in max vert. Those athletic concerns do show themselves on offense, too, as he shot under 52% at the rim on his non-dunk finishes. Still, Allen did measure well, posting a +4.25 wingspan. With the floor spacing, feel, and rebounding, Graves does provide modern offensive looks that NBA teams do value. Also, while the athleticism could hamper his defense, he does understand concepts and positioning, which may help him to grow into a respectable NBA defender.
24. Meleek Thomas
Then: 20
Now: 24 (↓)
Who Occupied #24 on My 1.0 Board?
John Blackwell.
Why Meleek Thomas is Here Now:
Meleek’s season was one of the more fascinating seasons of the entire cycle. It may shock some people to know this, but Meleek was recruited as a point guard prospect in the same class as Darius Acuff Jr. While they played different styles, they were both featured and projected as high-usage guards—which meant they had to learn to play together. Thomas was used more as an off-guard, and it took some time for him to grow comfortable in that role, but he was able to. ‘Leek is one of the best shooting prospects in this class—hitting almost 42% from deep on 9.6 attempts per 100 possessions. His release is fluid, compact, quick, and repeatable. His touch also shows through in his free-throw percentage. Defensively, Thomas did grow into a competitor on that end—after showing some early struggles. His length and effort on that end offer some projectable qualities that should help his transition to the league. His decision-making—albeit on modest volume—is indicative of the fact that he was considered a lead guard in high school. He did not turn the ball over much, and he posted an A:TO of 2.5.
Meleek’s height is likely to come into question. He was listed at 6’5” at Arkansas, but he did come in at 6’3” barefoot. That height may lock him in as a 2-Guard for many people. What helps Thomas is he does have a solid frame that looks like it will be able to handle more mass—and he weighed in 190 pounds. His +3.75 wingspan allowed him to be able to make smart plays on the ball and make some smart rotations. But, how much defensive versatility is he going to be able to provide in the NBA? That is my biggest question: how does the physicality scale? That concern shows up in his defensive scaling, his finishing through contact, and in his rebounding to some extent. If he can get back into handling the ball more, Meleek could offer more than what he was able to show at Arkansas.
25. Isaiah Evans
Then: 31
Now: 25 (↑)
Who Occupied #25 on My 1.0 Board?
Karim Lopez.
Why Isaiah Evans is Here Now:
The shooting with Isaiah Evans was one of the most sure things from any player coming into the season. He followed up his 41.6% on 18.1 threes per 100 possessions with a 36.1% season on 15.6 attempts per 100. Isaiah was a constant floor spacer, and he gets the shot off quickly—not to mention the elevation he gets on the jumper. One of the best developments that took place this season was how much he attacked the basket. Evan drove to the paint twice as much as he did the year prior, and he shot just under 49% from the floor. While he isn’t the best perimeter defender in college this year, he took a meaningful step forward on that end. He really competes—giving effort to stay in front of his man, getting in on closeouts, and trying to play passing lanes.
Evans has solid length with a +3.25 wingspan. He is a little slimmer for his length, and the strength does show in his rebounding numbers—as well as his ability to finish through contact. There can also be some moments where he isn’t the best playmaker, either, but that is just evaluating him in a vacuum and evaluating all of his strengths and weaknesses out in the open. The good thing for Isaiah is that he has real, specialist skills that give him a way to get his foot in the door.
26. Koa Peat
Then: 7
Now: 26 (↓↓)
Who Occupied #26 on My 1.0 Board?
Yaxel Lendeborg.
Why Koa Peat is Here Now:
Peat’s season is one of the most interesting and polarizing that has taken place this season. After one of the most prestigious high school career, I had some high expectations for Koa Peat. The family background, the size, and the skill that he possessed—all of those things had me ranking him in my Top 10. Peat’s strength did show up in a number of areas of his game. Peat was incredibly adept at scoring in the paint. He shot just under 67% at the rim—ranking in the 84th percentile in efficiency. While his rebounding numbers weren’t overwhelming, there is reason to believe that teaming with Motiejus Krivas and Tobe Awaka may have eaten into his potential rebounds. He defended well up the lineup and could scale well between threes, fours, and some fives. He can also finish above the rim.
I genuinely liked his passing feel and decision-making over the course of the season—and it was the basis of my Jaime Jaquez Jr. comparison. He can find his guys on the move and in stride. The biggest problem areas of Peat’s game come down to a couple of things. The outside shot is the major flaw—and one that is going to drive his ultimate outcome. He only took 13 attempts from deep—just four more than Krivas—but he made 35%. The mechanics were wildly retooled during the combine, and the form was heavily criticized for good reason. The other thing that makes his evaluation peculiar is his consistency. His highs rivaled those of any other prospect, but he also had games where he completely disappeared. He would even disappear on defense and on the boards. It’s because of this that I believe he has a shot to be the Peyton Watson of this class; he could be a far better pro than he was in college. Still, that’s a tricky foundation to have as the basis of a player’s draft stock.
27. Nate Ament
Then: 16
Now: 27 (↓)
Who Occupied #27 on My 1.0 Board?
Bryson Tiller.
Why Nate Ament is Here Now:
I was skeptical of Nate Ament coming into the season. I didn’t buy his movement to get to his shots. I didn’t buy his on-ball game translating. But I did think that he could be a player who could be an impactful as a defender a floor spacer. Even in those areas, Nate left something to be desired. He shot just over 33% from deep on just under eight attempts from deep per 100 possessions. That percentage didn’t change much whether he was left open or not. He also shot under 29% from deep off the bounce. His defense did improve over the course of the season, as he posted a Block Percentage of 2.7, and a Steal Percentage of 1.9. He proved to be a solid help defender—someone who uses their length to contest and bother shots.
The concerns that came with Nate’s strength were pretty much negated. He came into Tennessee looking strong. He rebounded well and drew a ton of contact. He had 25 And-Ones on the season—which is higher than all three Michigan Wolverine prospects. While I have concerns about his passing off of the live dribble, he looked quite good when stationary.
I’m speaking to a few good points that I have observed in most of this breakdown, so why am I lower on Ament than most? This could be nothing, but I don’t like his movement and balance, and I just don’t like his timidness. The Vols had to take him out of games multiple times this season in order for them to have a chance at winning. I get that players his size don’t grow on trees, but the one thing that may be worse than passing on a player of his size is getting the wrong player of his size.
28. Christian Anderson
Then: 39
Now: 28 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #28 on My 1.0 Board?
Dewayne Brown II.
Why Christian Anderson is Here Now:
I haven’t been as high on Christian Anderson throughout the cycle as others—and I genuinely think he will get drafted higher than this. And I understand why. Anderson is one of—if not the—best shooting prospects in this class. He shot nearly 42% from deep on over 12 three-point attempts per 100 possessions. When he was left open from deep, he shot over 51% on catch-and-shoot looks from distance. He complimented that by shooting just under 42% from deep on shots off the bounce. He also showed off how well he could operate as an on-ball guard this season—especially with JT Toppin missing time. Christian ranked in the 90th percentile in pick-and-roll in possessions including passes. His ability to switch between scorer and initiator was quite impressive.
Anderson did struggle with turnovers in this past season, which may limit how many reps NBA coaches would want to trust him operating as a primary option. The other obvious concern with Christian is his frame. He is going to be about 6’2” in shoes, and he was the fifth-lightest player at the combine. And, even though he did have a long wingspan, he was a below-average rebounder—even as a point guard. He also struggled to finish with any sort of contact. This limits him a bit as a one-position defender on that end, and a floor spacing connector on offense. That player can still be effective in the NBA—I just wouldn’t be in a hurry to take them significantly higher.
29. Sergio de Larrea
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 29 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #29 on My 1.0 Board?
LeJuan Watts.
Why Sergio de Larrea is Here Now:
I haven’t been the biggest de Larrea guy over the course of the season, but there aren’t many players who can do the sort of things that he can. And that’s just in general—let alone are their prospects who can do what he can at his height. For one, he has morphed into a very good floor spacer. He shot just under 41% on catch-and-shoot looks, and just under 36% on his dribble-jumper threes. At his size, that level of floor spacing gives him equity on and off the ball. De Larrea is also a pretty above-average playmaker as well. Taking him this late doesn’t lock him into having to be a lead handler, but having him as a second-side creator—on top of being a more-than-capable shooter—gives him multiple ways for him to be impactful on offense.
Defensively, Sergio leaves some things to be desired. He wants to be solid on that end—which is a lot of the battle—but he isn’t anywhere near as fundamental on defense as he is on offense. He can get out of position a decent amount. He can get screened relatively easy—and he doesn’t show much in terms being able to recover when he is behind the play. And, while he can be quite creative as a passer, he can throw a fair share of head-scratching looks. Those things can get cleaned up, and there is reason to believe that he can certainly help lineups stay organized.
30. Baba Miller
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 30 (↑↑↑)
Who Occupied #30 on My 1.0 Board?
Tyrone Riley IV.
Why Baba Miller is Here Now:
Baba Miller is such an interesting player—an oddity to some degree. We don’t know if he is going to be a consistent scorer outside of an arm’s reach away from the basket, which is a sizable concern. However, what makes Baba intriguing for me at this range is his combination of size, athleticism, feel, and defensive impact. While Miller isn’t much of a shooter, he is nearly 7’ in shoes and moves in a pretty special way. Baba has ball skills for his size and can make some exceptional passes out of the frontcourt. So, with that passing and him having real rim gravity, Miller can play a respectable role on the offensive end.
Defensively, Miller has a lot to offer. There is some real Jonathan Isaac-esque impact on that end, as he can rotate over to make awe-inspiring saves at the rim. He’s still a little thin at his size—he weighed in at 208 pounds in Chicago—so he isn’t likely to defend centers full-time. But I think he can survive in some rotations in the early going while he continues to fill out. He does need to become a little more fundamentally sound on defense—not biting so consistently on pumps or pivots. But the defensive playmaking in concert with his fluidity is alluring. He’ll be helpful on the defensive glass, but he needs to strengthen his base in order to hold his ground when competing for offensive rebounds and putbacks. Again, the shooting is not something a team should count on in the immediate. However, he is seriously impactful on defense, while still having some rim gravity and positional playmaking.
Second Round
31. Alex Karaban
Then: 62
Now: 31 (↑)
Who Occupied #31 on My 1.0 Board?
Isaiah Evans.
32. Ryan Conwell
Then: 34
Now: 32 (↑)
Who Occupied #32 on My 1.0 Board?
Billy Richmond III.
33. Richie Saunders
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 33 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #33 on My 1.0 Board?
Tahaad Pettiford.
34. Aaron Nkrumah
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 34 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #34 on My 1.0 Board?
Ryan Conwell.
35. Trevon Brazile
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 35 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #35 on My 1.0 Board?
Alvaro Folgueiras.
36. Chris Cenac Jr.
Then: 13
Now: 36 (↓↓)
Who Occupied #36 on My 1.0 Board?
Tarris Reed Jr.
37. Henri Veesaar
Then: 70
Now: 37 (↑)
Who Occupied #37 on My 1.0 Board?
JT Toppin.
38. Joshua Jefferson
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 38 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #38 on My 1.0 Board?
Karter Knox.
39. Quadir Copeland
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 39 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #39 on My 1.0 Board?
Christian Anderson.
A Scout’s Take: Quadir Copeland’s ACC Revenge Tour and NBA Draft Emergence
The lead guard class has been spectacular this cycle, highlighted by the likes of Darryn Peterson, Mikel Brown Jr., Kingston Flemings, Darius Acuff, Christian Anderson Jr., and Bennett Stirtz. But what about North Carolina State’s fiery floor general,
40. Braden Smith
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 40 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #40 on My 1.0 Board?
Patrick Ngongba II.
41. Maliq Brown
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 41 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #41 on My 1.0 Board?
Alex Condon.
42. Dillon Mitchell
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 42 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #42 on My 1.0 Board?
Dash Daniels.
43. Ja’Kobi Gillespie
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 43 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #43 on My 1.0 Board?
Adrian Wooley.
Corey's Scouting Notebook: Vanderbilt vs. Tennessee - Nate Ament, Tyler Tanner, and More in an SEC Showdown in Nashville
Making the trek from New York to Nashville, battling a blizzard on my return home, all to get eyes on potential lotto pick Nate Ament, draft darling Tyler Tanner, and a plethora of NBA prospects? That’s the kind of chaotic scenario that makes me love scouting trips so much. I was lucky enough to stay with and bring my longtime friend, Robert Ragosta, along for the game—fresh off winning his first Grammy as a songwriter for the last Jelly Roll album, I might add.
44. Tyler Bilodeau
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 44 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #44 on My 1.0 Board?
Paul McNeil.
45. Jaden Bradley
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 45 (↑↑)
Who Occupied #45 on My 1.0 Board?
Boogie Fland.
Respect Jaden Bradley | The Prospect Overview
I feel like a lot of different guards have gotten their moment in the 2026 NBA Draft spotlight this cycle. It makes sense. This has been one of the best guard groups in recent memory. Freshmen like Kingston Flemings, Darius Acuff Jr., Mikel Brown, and Brayden Burries are hot commodities. Returners such as Labaron Philon, Christian Anderson, Bennett Stirtz, and Tyler Tanner have all been ultra-productive. There’s only so much oxygen in the room at any given time. But today, I’m going to ask you to spare some of your breath for
46. Ugonna Onyenso
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 46 (↑)
Who Occupied #46 on My 1.0 Board?
Cameron Carr.
Jam’s Journal: Wagler Watch and Onyenso’s Outstanding Outing | Recapping In-person Scouts of Virginia Tech-Virginia and Illinois-Maryland
To close out my regular season in-person scouts, the basketball gods blessed me with a couple of stellar games last weekend: Virginia Tech-Virginia in the Commonwealth Clash and Illinois-Maryland. Virginia prevailed 76-72, led by a rising big man prospect against a Virginia Tech team led by a prospect that was a consensus 2026 first rounder to start the…
47. Rafael Castro
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 47 (↑)
Who Occupied #47 on My 1.0 Board?
Tomislav Ivisic.
48. Malique Lewis
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 48 (↑)
Who Occupied #48 on My 1.0 Board?
Xaivian Lee.
49. Jaden Henley
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 49 (↑)
Who Occupied #49 on My 1.0 Board?
Malachi Moreno.
50. Tyler Nickel
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 50 (↑)
Who Occupied #50 on My 1.0 Board?
Otega Oweh.
Five Interesting Prospects on the Margins in the 2026 NBA Draft | The Prospect Overview
I’ve always loved scouting on the margins. For starters, I always found it interesting. When I first started to dive deeper into the draft work, it was always easy to find content on the top prospects in the draft. The further down the board I went, though, the less information I was able to find. There was always a sense of mystery around prospects ranked in that range, and I wanted to fill that niche as much as possible when I first started to produce public-facing content.
51. Emanuel Sharp
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 51 (↑)
Who Occupied #51 on My 1.0 Board?
Nate Bittle.
52. Kowacie Reeves Jr.
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 52 (↑)
Who Occupied #52 on My 1.0 Board?
Tyrone Riley IV.
The 2026 PIT Diaries: Day Four
My final day in Portsmouth was just as much fun as the three previous days. Early in the morning, my cohost, Jam Hines, headed home, but we were able to do a podcast recapping the second and third days of the tournament. Soon after we were finished, I had to upload the show and head out, as the games on the last day kicked off at 12:30 pm ET. Once I got into the gym, I was a little surprised by how many people were in attendance. Typically, the final day can be a little thin in the bleachers, but there were a lot of fans, media, and scouts present. I credit that to how awesome the players have been this year.
53. Nick Martinelli
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 53 (↑)
Who Occupied #53 on My 1.0 Board?
Tucker DeVries.
Nick Martinelli is Not Normal
One of the hardest parts of scouting, for me at least, is dealing with overexposure. Sometimes, when I watch too much of a player, I find myself becoming overly critical. I can sweat the details and finer points of a prospect’s game while ignoring the big picture, broad-brush, important aspects of their game. Plus, these guys are young. Just because a p…
54. Tre’Von Spillers
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 54 (↑)
Who Occupied #54 on My 1.0 Board?
Magoon Gwath.
55. Ernest Udeh Jr.
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 55 (↑)
Who Occupied #55 on My 1.0 Board?
Rowan Brumbaugh.
56. Felix Okpara
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 56 (↑)
Who Occupied #56 on My 1.0 Board?
Kam Williams.
57. Robert McCray V
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 57 (↑)
Who Occupied #57 on My 1.0 Board?
Neoklis Avdalas.
Metcalf's 2026 NBA Draft Scouting Files 11/11 - 11/18
Every week, I’m going to share my 2026 NBA Draft scouting notes on who I watched that week and my biggest takeaways. This week’s notes will encapsulate the games from 11/11 – 11/18, and we had some incredible matchups. Let’s dive into why and so much more.
58. Otega Oweh
Then: 50
Now: 58 (↓)
Who Occupied #58 on My 1.0 Board?
Chase Ross.
59. Lamar Wilkerson
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 59 (↑)
Who Occupied #59 on My 1.0 Board?
Blake Harper.
G-League Elite Camp Day One Reactions
The NBA Combine cycle is underway for the 2026 NBA Draft, and things got started with a full day at the G-League Elite Camp. The crew shares their biggest takeaways, biggest surprises, who they need to see more from, and much more.
60. Peter Suder
Then: Not Ranked
Now: 60 (↑)
Who Occupied #60 on My 1.0 Board?
Max Green.
The 2026 PIT Diaries: Day Two
Stephen: Day Two in Portsmouth was another awesome day! The day started off a little earlier, with the first game kicking off at 3:30 pm ET. Jam and I podded around noon, hit up a restaurant at the casino (the closest I’ve ever been to being inside a casino, by the way). and then made our way inside as the game kicked off. Of course, getting to link up with some scouts, media, and agents made the day more fun than it otherwise would have been…but I’m ready to talk HOOPS!
Follow me on Twitter: StephenGHoops
Catch me on BlueSky: StephenGHoops
Catch the Draft Sickos show LIVE on the No Ceilings NBA channel:
Bruce Thornton is the only player in the history of NCAA basketball to have 2000 points, 500 rebounds, 500 assists and less than 180 turnovers in a career; but he isn't on this list. His fg accuracy was .550 which is above sky high for a point guard. He consistently kept his turnovers below 50 a year and had a 4 to 1 assists to turnovers ratio his sophomore year, while playing with a 6'8" starting center in the Big 10.