2026 First Round Pick Armageddon

[leswizards]

The Wizards currently have the fifth worst record in the NBA and are 1 game out of the sixth worst record. If the season were to end today, the Wizards would have a 0.6% chance of losing their first round pick.

[Benjammin]

If they slip to 6th, I think the odds of losing the pick are 3.4%. And no, I don't want to be sitting there on draft lottery night even with those odds. At 7, it's a 14.3% chance. And at 8 it's a 39.3% chance.

[closg00]

I’m not convinced that Hagler can be an NBA PG, but Hagler and Mikel Brown Jr should be there for us. If we drop, BPA could be one of the PG’s, and we should take one of them. I would consider trading down for one of the bigs, like Steinbach or Yaxel.

[Benjammin]

^You mean Wagler, not Hagler, just a typo or auto correct. Keaton may not be a pure PG but he would certainly fit with our collection of multi-skilled players like Will Riley and Kyshawn George. I would be happy with the value if our pick is at 6. At 7 or 8, maybe Acuff or Brown.

[Frichuela]

^You mean Wagler, not Hagler, just a typo or auto correct. Keaton may not be a pure PG but he would certainly fit with our collection of multi-skilled players like Will Riley and Kyshawn George. I would be happy with the value if our pick is at 6. At 7 or 8, maybe Acuff or Brown.

I like Wagler's game, I am just concerned about his D.

A backcourt of Tre Johnson, Wagler, Bub and Trae is pretty bad defensively...

This is why the prospect of Peterson is much more enticing as he is a truly 2-way player.

[Benjammin]

^Well yeah, I'd rather have Peterson too. But if they are unlucky and are picking at 6 Peterson will be long gone. Perhaps Flemings might be there or more likely Wagler or Acuff.

[closg00]

An appropriate bump. The situation is grave, we will probably beat the Pacers again. We just aren’t being as shameless as them, we can do better.

[PaulinVA]

^You mean Wagler, not Hagler, just a typo or auto correct. Keaton may not be a pure PG but he would certainly fit with our collection of multi-skilled players like Will Riley and Kyshawn George. I would be happy with the value if our pick is at 6. At 7 or 8, maybe Acuff or Brown.

Trae loves Acuff:

Read on Twitter

[tontoz]

^You mean Wagler, not Hagler, just a typo or auto correct. Keaton may not be a pure PG but he would certainly fit with our collection of multi-skilled players like Will Riley and Kyshawn George. I would be happy with the value if our pick is at 6. At 7 or 8, maybe Acuff or Brown.

I like Wagler's game, I am just concerned about his D.

A backcourt of Tre Johnson, Wagler, Bub and Trae is pretty bad defensively...

This is why the prospect of Peterson is much more enticing as he is a truly 2-way player.

Any backcourt with Trae Young will be bad defensively. That is a given but i dont expect Trae to be here more than a year so i don't think it really matters.

With Sarr at the 4 and a defensive C next to him (Davis or someone else) our interior D should be elite. With length on the perimeter to contest shots from 3 i think our defense will be a strength, not a weakness, if we draft Wagler. I haven't seen anything in college to make me think Wagler is some defensive liability.

[pcbothwel]

An appropriate bump. The situation is grave, we will probably beat the Pacers again. We just aren’t being as shameless as them, we can do better.

Im ok with the Wiz going out with SOME dignity. Sitting vets/productive players, especially on road games/back to backs, can be cringy but completely fair game in order to properly tank. But having to play G-Leaguers AND devising schemes in order to lose is beyond the pale and the B-Ball gods will smite thee.
Need I remind folks of the position within the lotto the teams picking in the top 3 were in since they changed the odds in 2019:
2019 Draft:
New Orleans Pelicans (7th-best odds)
Memphis Grizzlies (8th-best odds)
New York Knicks (1st-best odds / worst record)

2020 Draft:
Minnesota Timberwolves (3rd-best odds)
Golden State Warriors (2nd-best odds / worst record)
Charlotte Hornets (8th-best odds)

2021 Draft:
Detroit Pistons (2nd-best odds)
Houston Rockets (1st-best odds / worst record)
Cleveland Cavaliers (5th-best odds)

2022 Draft:
Orlando Magic (2nd-best odds)
Oklahoma City Thunder (4th-best odds)
Houston Rockets (1st-best odds / worst record)

2023 Draft:
San Antonio Spurs (3rd-best odds)
Charlotte Hornets (4th-best odds)
Portland Trail Blazers (5th-best odds)

2024 Draft:
Atlanta Hawks (10th-best odds)
Washington Wizards (2nd-best odds)
Brooklyn Nets (9th-best odds)

2025 Draft:
Dallas Mavericks (11th-best odds)
San Antonio Spurs (8th-best odds)
Philadelphia 76ers (5th-best odds)

I asked Grok to ignore the actual odds and do a trend analysis simply from the last 7 drafts...Very interesting and leaves me less concerned:
"- The 1st position (worst record) has landed in the top 3 only 3 times out of 7 drafts (all at No. 3: 2019, 2021, 2022), and never at No. 1 or No. 2. It has often slid out of the top 3 entirely in several years.
- The 2nd position has performed strongest among the bottom tier, landing in the top 3 five times (No. 1 in 2021, No. 2 in 2020/2024, No. 1 in 2022 wait no—actually: No. 2 in 2020, No. 1 in 2021, No. 2 in 2024; also relevant in others indirectly). It frequently stays high or jumps to 1st.
- Positions 3rd–5th are consistently strong for top-3 finishes (appearing in top 3 in 5–6 of the 7 drafts), often landing No. 1 or No. 3 (e.g., multiple No. 1s from 3rd, several No. 3s from 5th).
- Mid-to-lower lottery positions (7th–11th) have produced big jumps, especially for No. 1 (7th in 2019, 10th in 2024, 11th in 2025) and No. 2 (8th in 2019/2025). These "upsets" from outside the bottom 6 have occurred in 4 of 7 drafts for at least one top-3 spot.
- Overall pattern: Top 3 is rarely dominated by the absolute bottom 1–3 positions (only ~40% of top-3 slots go to 1st–3rd pre-lottery). Instead, a mix prevails—bottom teams (1st–5th) claim many spots, but mid-tier (6th–11th) frequently snag 1–2 of the top 3, creating high variance.

In summary, since flattening, the lottery has rewarded a range of positions rather than strictly the worst records. The sweet spot for landing top 3 appears to be 2nd–5th (consistent high finishes) or 7th–11th (for occasional massive jumps to No. 1/No. 2), while purely being 1st has been the riskiest (frequent drops to 3rd or lower)."

[dobrojim]

Heartening words perhaps.

That said, as anyone who has studied probability knows,
assuming each draw is an independent event, past
results don't influence future events. 5 coin flips to
heads doesn't change the probability of the 6th flip.

But you knew that.

[lastemp3ror]

Heartening words perhaps.

That said, as anyone who has studied probability knows,
assuming each draw is an independent event, past
results don't influence future events. 5 coin flips to
heads doesn't change the probability of the 6th flip.

But you knew that.

Exactly. In addition, this isn't only about who (luckily) moves up to the top with the odds they were given, as history has shown. It's also about how far you can move down. As an example, finishing last means we can't go lower than the 5th pick. Yeah, maybe we are "locked" to pick no lower than 8th, but do we really want our floor to be the 8th pick?

[pcbothwel]

Heartening words perhaps.

That said, as anyone who has studied probability knows,
assuming each draw is an independent event, past
results don't influence future events. 5 coin flips to
heads doesn't change the probability of the 6th flip.

But you knew that.

I think the point is being missed. Im not saying that the evidence of events CONFLICTs with the probability on paper, Im saying people have a hard time visualizing/understanding what the probability on paper actually means in terms of real-world application.
The last 7 years doesnt conflict with the probability but simply shows you the fruits from that tree.

If we end up in the 4th position vs the 2nd position, then I will live with whatever outcome because our organization (FO <=> Coaching) has done EVERYTHING in their power to rebuild from the studs and move win now players for future assets/more losses this year.
If the only way to move up 1-2 spots in the draft is to sit guys like Sarr, Tre, Riley, and George... then I'm good with the additionally wins.
People who feel the opposite have lost the plot. The guys I listed WILL be part of the next competitive Wiz team, and we need them to improve and get reps.

[payitforward]

Obviously, I hope we get #1, or at least in the top 3.

OTOH, I'm not sure that Darius Acuff won't wind up the best player out of this deep deep draft.

[payitforward]

I'd say the best player is taken in the top 3 about half the time. & more often at 3, I'd bet, than at 1.

[doclinkin]

I'd say the best player is taken in the top 3 about half the time. & more often at 3, I'd bet, than at 1.

Studies have shown that the number one overall has the greatest chance of being a Hall of Famer.

There’s a weird bump at number five that also seems to be strong. But obviously that doesn’t carry over from year to year, just a relic of who was selected at five.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Heartening words perhaps.

That said, as anyone who has studied probability knows,
assuming each draw is an independent event, past
results don't influence future events. 5 coin flips to
heads doesn't change the probability of the 6th flip.

But you knew that.

Maybe I am terrible at statistics, but the chances of landing heads 5 times is (1/2)**5=1/32.

A sixth xonsecutive heads would be ((1/2)**6=1/64.

The chances of that not happening are 63/64.

After that fifth heads, I would bet someone else's farm on tails.

[PaulinVA]

Heartening words perhaps.

That said, as anyone who has studied probability knows,
assuming each draw is an independent event, past
results don't influence future events. 5 coin flips to
heads doesn't change the probability of the 6th flip.

But you knew that.

Maybe I am terrible at statistics, but the chances of landing heads 5 times is (1/2)**5=1/32.

A sixth xonsecutive heads would be ((1/2)**6=1/64.

The chances of that not happening are 63/64.

After that fifth heads, I would bet someone else's farm on tails.

Pulling upon my high school math days, I believe the odds of getting heads six times in a row are one-in-sixty-four BEFORE you flip your first flip. After already getting heads five times in a row, the sixth flip has 50-50 odds irrespective of the five (or however else many) flips that previously resulted.

[payitforward]

I'd say the best player is taken in the top 3 about half the time. & more often at 3, I'd bet, than at 1.

Studies have shown that the number one overall has the greatest chance of being a Hall of Famer....

The main problem with all this stuff is that the metrics are not really "objective" in any strict sense.

What happens, for example, when you look at HOF as the phenomenon to be explained rather than as the explanatory metric: what % of HOF players were drafted #1, for example?

...There’s a weird bump at number five that also seems to be strong. But obviously that doesn’t carry over from year to year, just a relic of who was selected at five.

All of this is a "relic" (i.e. a graph) of who was selected when. Moreover, the minute you break scale things start to fall apart.

To take a random example, consider the '08 draft. When you see Michael Beasley, O.J. Mayo, Joe Alexander, Jerryd Bayless, Jason Thompson, Brandon Rush & Anthony Thompson all lottery picks, while Ryan Anderson, Serge Ibaka & Nic Batum are at the bottom of R1, not to mention DeAndre Jordan & Goran Dragic down in R2, you understand that a simple formula like pick position does not suffice to explain anything.

Of course, in general, better players are taken near the top than near the bottom -- it'd be a weird world in which that were not true in some general sense.

But that fact has no significant impact on any particular set of outcomes. It didn't help Anthony Bennett succeed to take a single example -- & of course the real problem is not the "single example" but the colossal number of "exceptions" to any so-called rule.

You still want a higher pick rather than a lower one. Just as you don't want the waiter to tell you they're out of the dish you'd like for dinner. Not even if the one still available is better.

[Zonkerbl]

I doubt the draft is purely random. What i would do (as commush) is run the lotto several times and make sure I'm ok with the result. If I wanted to discourage tanking I'd make sure someone outside the worst 5 gets a top 3 each year.