Wig's 2026 Draft Preview/Scouting Report

[WigNosy]

So for this article, I thought I’d take a look at the projected lotto prospects, and try to figure out what kind of players they are, as well as what rationale the computer might have for ranking them in the order that it did. And, it turns out, I disagree with the computer more often than not. We all know that blue-potential players always seem to go before green-potential players, but that’s not always the case with draft previews. So with that in mind, here’s a combination of a quick scouting report on the lotto prospects, and argument as to why that player is projected to go where he is, and a counter-argument as to why the preview might be wrong and that team might choose to go in another direction. Hopefully it’s a little bit different than the liveblog was (especially since it’s done in advance)… and if I didn’t cover your favorite player, sorry. Like I said, I’m going off the draft preview, not my own personal rankings. And of course trades and the lotto may scramble this order anyway, but this is what I'm thinking as we get the playoffs wound down and head to the offseason.

1. Joshua Campbell, 6-7, SF, Syracuse

Campbell projects as a scoring SF who should come into the league with the ability to score immediately. He has good all-around athleticism and a nose for the ball on the offensive glass. He showed some touch from three in college but will have to work hard to get to his ceiling. He isn't much of a passer, his handles need work, and his defense is mediocre; however, for a guy his size he looks to have the potential to grow into a pretty good defender and should eventually be a solid two-way player.

Comparable: Cedric Ceballos

Argument for the Jazz picking him: The Jazz need talent, and Slim Jenkins isn’t good enough to force them to look elsewhere. Campbell is probably the most complete player in the draft and even if his game has a few holes, there’s no deficiency that will truly hold him back.

Argument against the Jazz picking him: The Jazz need a superstar, and while Campbell looks solid, he may not have superstar potential. In addition, to get good quickly, it might be better to pick a big man to pair with Pulley so that the Jazz can at least establish a dominant frontcourt.


2. Donn Ybarra, 7-0, C, Texas A&M

Ybarra has shown flashes of a nice scoring touch around the rim and shows good potential as a rebounder and shot-blocker. His strength leaves a bit to be desired and he may struggle to get good looks inside as a result; however, the potential for him to play stretch-five may help mitigate that somewhat. Overall, he looks like a good classic big man with a surprising three-point shot and ability to anticipate passes and get steals; however, lack of athleticism probably limits his ceiling.

Comparable: Greg Monroe

Argument for the Grizzlies picking him: The cupboard is bare and Ybarra gives them a solid foundational piece to build around. Also, he’s super-young so if the Grizz can climb out of their luxury tax bill in time to re-sign him, they’ll be set in the middle for a long time.

Argument against the Grizzlies picking him: If the Grizzlies are going to improve their team via trade, they don’t want “solid” – they want “splashy numbers” so they can get more value in return for a trade. If that’s the case, Timothee Delecroix might be a better choice for splash.

3. John Moore, 6-4, SG, Villanova

More of a shooter than a pure scorer, relied a lot on speed to get space in college. Lack of height is a bit of a concern, and doesn't have the size or strength on his frame to take the ball inside consistently. Handle still a little raw, but should be able to tighten that up. Will take a few seasons to learn how to get off his shot consistently, especially at 6-4, and while probably not suited to be a team's number one option, could make a great number two or number three.

Comparable: Bradley Beal

Argument for the Bobcats picking him: Moore slots in nicely along the team’s young core, which is a bit lacking in outside shooting. The Bobcats have enough young talent not to need him to be the team’s number one scorer – he’ll probably be their third or fourth option – which means he should be effective there.

Argument against the Bobcats picking him: The Bobcats already have a ton of young wings. They should be looking instead for a solid big to anchor their defense or perhaps a point guard (okay, there aren’t really any of those on the board). One of the Ohio State bigs (Stephen Rodney or Ernest Long) would likely be a better fit.

4. Hal Davis, 6-4, SG, Georgia

Prototypical three and D guard with better vision than you might expect. Already a competent defender and should quickly grow into a great one, especially with his speed. Surprisingly good passer, though lack of handles mean he probably can't be asked to run an offense full time. Lack of athleticism means he probably won't ever be able to effectively create his own shot.

Comparable: Otto Porter Jr. (though Davis is a bit smaller)

Argument for the Clippers picking him: Adding Davis to the rotation of Colby Lopez, Emmitt McNeil, Phil Brooks, and Zach LaVine gives the Clippers the chance to maintain a group of fierce perimeter defenders that can switch everything. They could lean fully into the “defend the perimeter and bomb from the perimeter” squad they’ve been putting together and put a ton of pressure on opposing backcourts.

Argument against the Clippers picking him: Much like the Bobcats, the Clips already have plenty of talent at the 2-guard spot. They don’t really have anything up front and need a big man much more than a guy who will ride the pine behind Emmitt McNeil.

5. Timothee Delecroix, 6-6, SG, Minnesota

Good size for a shooting guard, and excellent quickness but athleticism is a bit questionable. Has a nice jump shot but handles and vision lacking. Projects as an excellent defender with the power to body up bigger wings in the post. If he gets with a team willing to work on his handles and put some work into his shot creation, could become a big-time scoring guard.

Comparable: D'Angelo Russell

Argument for the Thunder picking him: The Thunder roster is fairly well-rounded with youth all around, so they should look at best player available. Delecroix can add yet more depth to a team that is waiting for all of its young players to finish growing into themselves.

Argument against the Thunder picking him: The oldest member of the young core, Eckbert Winkler, is probably going to be out of his prime by the time the likes of Maravich and Cage are ready for prime time. Getting a player that can at least pretend to handle point guard duties would be a good idea but barring that they might want to pick up another big (is this a possible landing spot for Edmund Madson, who kind of fits both?)

6. Frank Slate, 6-9, SG, Connecticut

Teams might be scared off by the fact this first-team All-American spent 4 years in college. He is an athletic freak with size that simply overpowered players in college; however, other than his jump shot, his game is extremely raw and he is shockingly allergic to defensive rebounding for a player his size, and doesn't show much of an interest in defense. He should be able to make an impact right away with his athleticism, but what we see his rookie year will probably be his peak unless a team is willing to invest substantially in player development.

Comparable: Edward Adorno

Argument for the Knicks picking him: Slate’s athleticism is desperately needed on an aging team. The Knicks don’t have a great incumbent at the wing anyway, and could take advantage of his size by creating mismatches for him. Having a built-in mismatch is always a good way to get production and he would help the Knicks be freaky long.

Argument against the Knicks picking him: He might be great now, but he’s probably close to his ceiling. The Knicks are about to tear it down for a rebuild and can afford to be patient. They should pick a player who is more raw but has a higher ceiling.

7. Laurence Curtin, 6-7, SG, Clemson

Has a silky smooth jumpshot and great three-point range; quick for his size but not an outstanding athletic prospect and hasn't shown much interest doing anything but shooting. Likely to become a niche player as a three-point bomber with limited other contributions.

Comparable: James Webster

Argument for the Bucks picking him: The Bucks are loaded with young talent and won’t be able to pay all of them superstar money. Picking a player that fits a niche – and with that the ability to pay niche money – means that they can probably keep Curtin when his rookie deal is up. Besides, they need an outside shooter because right now their team is iffy from three.

Argument against the Bucks picking him: The Bucks have a ton of young talent stockpiled and if they’re going to have to trade it away anyway, they’ll want stars to trade away, not niche players. Picking up a player with better potential means they can trade away some of today’s talent for future picks and talent, keeping the train going in Milwaukee.

8. Stephen Rodney, 6-10, PF, Ohio State

Extremely raw prospect with the potential to become an elite team defender, though his individual defense may never be quite as good. A team that drafts him will have to show a lot of patience, however, as he is likely to be on his second contract before he starts looking like the final version of himself. A patient team will be rewarded for taking him and a team willing to work on his individual post defense may well be able to turn him into a franchise player.

Comparable: Vernon Desantis

Argument for the Timberwolves picking him: The Wolves are committed to building around Luka Doncic, everything else short term doesn’t matter. Rodney would give them a great big and a second foundational piece alongside Luka. Every team want a good inside-out combo.

Argument against the Timberwolves picking him: They have plenty of young bigs and are a bit light on young backcourt players. They should look at picking up a perimeter player (especially if a player higher on this list has dropped).

9. Ernest Long, 7-1, C, Ohio State

If Rodney has the potential to be a great team defender, Long projects to be an elite individual defender. Has the potential to become a classic post, though a little weaker on defensive rebounding than I think most teams would like. Defense is a little farther along than Rodney and a team that doesn't need his offense could probably benefit from his defense and size as soon as this season.

Comparable: DeAndre Ayton

Argument for the Mavericks picking him: Long’s slight defensive rebounding shortcomings won’t be much of a problem on a team that already has James McCormick roaming the paint; putting the two of them together should do an effective job sealing up the paint. This gives the Mavericks a backstop for some of their guards’ defensive shortcomings and maybe lets them pound teams inside.

Argument against the Mavericks picking him: The Mavs already have James McCormick and they should be looking for a player to complement him, rather than reinforce him. Going for a more perimeter-oriented player would give their team better balance instead of hoping that Glenn Irvine finally does something.

10. Joe Gwinn, 6-10, PF, Syracuse

Gwinn is a bit quirky for a Power Forward; he has some nice speed and seems to display good court vision and a soft touch. He barely saw action for the Orange this season, though, so it's fair to wonder how long it's going to take for him to reach his potential. He looks like he could grow into a player that can use his superior quickness to get steals and knock down jumpers as a face-up shooter while still having the size to go inside and defend and get rebounds. May not wind up a dominant big man, but should be effective.

Comparable: Al Horford

Argument for the Pacers picking him: The Pacers have always shown an ability to get production out of unexpected places, and I can see Pauly figuring out how to turn Gwinn into an oversized SF that kills it from the perimeter. He’s certainly not afraid to take chances with interesting fits – witness the Karl-Anthony Towns experiment this season.

Argument against the Pacers picking him: Picking an odd duck as a player tends to force you to try to compensate elsewhere, and right now the Pacers are more in need of accurate shooting than doing weird offensive experiments with a perimeter-based player. In other words, they need someone who will generate higher-efficiency shots (Keenan White, perhaps?) than jumpers.

11. Keenan White, 7-0, C, Houston

A massive dude at 315 lbs, Houston's best skill is probably going to be standing in the middle of the paint and deterring shots. He has soft enough hands to score occasionally and his size makes him an imposing shot blocker, but he's never going to be able to carry an offense. He's also a little slow on the glass, so probably needs to be paired with a high-energy frontcourt mate.

Comparable: Mark Eaton

Argument for the Bulls picking him: White’s game overlaps quite a bit with Aaron Donald, and this pick would make Donald trade bait. In addition, it matches up their frontcourt’s likely peak ages with their Edmunds-Haugh backcourt peak (Donald is a little old). Besides, you can never have too much rim protection.

Argument against the Bulls picking him: The Bulls just saw this movie this past season with Aaron Donald in the middle. It didn’t get them a playoff bid, and there’s no reason to think that another guy who specializes in shot-blocking and interior scoring is going to change that.

12. Edmund Madson, 6-11, PF, Minnesota

Madson's game is really quirky; he has the great post defense and good defensive rebounding you'd expect from a classic big, but mixes them with terrific ballhandling skills and great anticipation to get steals. What he isn't, however, is a scorer or passer. He's going to be an eclectic fit with whatever team drafts him, and his value will be mostly at the defensive end - and he's still so raw he's a couple of seasons away from being effective. It's really hard to find a player with his skill set.

Comparable: Joakim Noah (without Noah's passing ability)

Argument for the Warriors picking him: The Warriors’ playoff push this season came without a ton of contribution from their frontcourt – Whiteside is ancient and Brett Lopez isn’t much of a scoring threat. Pairing Madson with Van Grimaldi and Harland Ellinger means those two will get more shots – and that’s a good thing! Letting the Warriors firms up their interior defense and his ability to handle the ball and get steals should make for extra possessions for a Warriors team many think should be primed for a playoff run this season.

Argument against the Warriors picking him: The Warriors really needed a frontcourt scorer last season and Madson isn’t that. They’d be better-served looking for a ready-made offensive talent in the post to complement Grim and Ellinger (rather like the guy projected to go #13).

13. Thomas Minter, 7-0, C, La Salle

Minter enters the league as a strong, polished, offensive force inside who will stay anchored in the paint except wandering out for the occasional three. His other skills are average at best but with a great touch inside and great strength, he can be effective right out of the gate - he'll never be a star, though.

Comparable: Buddy Pedraza

Argument for the Cavaliers picking him: Dirk Hardpeck is getting older and Minter can slide right in and pick up where Hardpeck will leave off. Maybe even start next to him for a while – it’s certainly a better plan than starting the 6-4 Angelo Chancellor at PF all season. You can’t teach height and this would let Dirk slide back to his natural PF position.

Argument against the Cavaliers picking him: Honestly, there really isn’t one. This is a great fit and there’s not another player left on the board that fits much better. It’s possible you could argue take the lone decent PG Jack Clemente to corner the market but that’s generally not a good idea.

14. Oliver Dennis, 6-8, SF, UCLA

Oliver is a well-rounded offensive player with good (not great) athleticism but is absolutely allergic to playing defense, which rather limits his ceiling. His career college shooting percentage of .398 suggests shot selection is something of an issue as well. He projects as a scorer off the bench but probably not a true starter unless his defense improves. He has the tools to be in the conversation for rookie of the year on a bad team where he gets a lot of touches, but until his defense improves, he'll be an empty stats guy.

Comparable: Lavar Ball

Argument for the Wizards picking him: He’s probably the best player available and while the Wizards have comparable talent to him, they’ve got comparable talent at nearly every position, so it’s not like they’re neglecting a position of need. He also fits with the Wizards’ recent trend of fielding an extremely tall team wherever possible so they might even try sliding him down to Shooting Guard.

Argument against the Wizards picking him: It’s possible they grade Tony Wilson or Bernardo Marcos higher due to better athleticism and/or more focused scoring skills despite being a couple of inches shorter. Really, though, all three of those guys are pretty much the same, so it’s a matter of taste more than need.

[garbageman]

> 3000 words, but you're only 6 away from cap, so you can claim the last 6 for this guy