At least eight people have died in a hot air balloon accident in Brazil, a state governor has said.
There were 21 people on board the balloon in the city of Praia Grande on Saturday morning, Governor of Santa Catarina Jorginho Mello said in a post on X.
Mello said 13 people survived and eight died. Rescue teams are at the site of the incident searching for others, he said.
“We are all shocked by the accident,” he added.
This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.
You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X to get the latest alerts.
The Senate parliamentarian on Friday ruled against several more Republican provisions in President Trump’s megabill, including language to bar immigrants who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents from receiving food assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
The parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, also ruled against a key Republican pay-for in the bill, a proposal requiring states to pay for a certain percentage of food assistance under SNAP depending on those states’ error rates in delivering aid.
The proposal to shift SNAP costs onto the states was a sticking point with Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Susan Collins (Maine).
The parliamentarian’s ruling could make it easier for Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to pick up Murkowski’s and Collins’s support as the SNAP-related pay-for will now need to be stripped from the legislation.
The Senate bill as drafted would have required states to pay between 5 and 15 percent of food benefits in 2028 on their rate of error in paying out food benefits.
Almost every state in the country has had error rates of 6 percent or higher, which would have shifted a significant percentage of the cost for delivering food assistance onto the states.
The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that the Senate language would have cost North Carolina, for example, to pay up to $438 million for food aid in 2028.
MacDonough struck another blow against the GOP leadership’s agenda by ruling against a section to extend the suspension of permanent price support authority, something that traditionally has been part of the farm bill.
Congress passed a one-year extension of the farm bill in December after Democrats and Republicans failed to reach a deal on a multi-year extension of the law due to disagreements over SNAP funding.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, applauded the parliamentarian’s decision on Friday.
“The Senate parliamentarian has begun providing guidance that certain provisions in the Republicans’ One Big, Beautiful Betrayal will be subject to the Byrd Rule — ultimately meaning they will need to be stripped from the bill or altered to comply with the rules of reconciliation,” Merkley said in a statement.
“As much as Senate Republicans would prefer to throw out the rule book at advance their conservative families lose and billionaires win agenda, this process has rules and Democrats are making sure those rules are enforced,” he added. “We will be fighting this bill every single day until Republicans bring it to the floor.”
Provisions of the reconciliation package that the parliamentarian decides violate the Senate’s Byrd Rule are not eligible to pass with a simple-majority vote.
If Thune and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) don’t remove provisions found to be in violation of the Byrd Rule, the Republican package would need to muster 60 votes to advance.
The parliamentarian ruled against several provisions of the bill under the Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction, including a section that appropriated $250 million to Coast Guard stations on South Padre Island, Texas, damaged by fire in 2025.
She also ruled that language allocating $85 million to transfer the space shuttle on display at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum to a non-profit group in Texas would not be eligible for the budget reconciliation fast track.
Provisions found not to comply with the Byrd Rule would need at least 60 votes to overcome a point-of-order objection.
We came across a bullish thesis on Align Technology, Inc. (ALGN) on DIY Investor’s Substack. In this article, we will summarize the bulls’ thesis on ALGN. Align Technology, Inc. (ALGN)’s share was trading at $188.07 as of 10th June. ALGN’s trailing and forward P/E were 32.9 and 17.7 respectively according to Yahoo Finance
Here’s a rewritten and expanded version of the article, tailored for clarity, depth, and reader engagement, while preserving the financial and strategic insights on Align Technology:
Top 15 Countries for Dental Tourism — Plus a Look at Align Technology’s Investment Potential
A confident smile is not only a sign of good dental health but also increasingly a symbol of cutting-edge dental innovation. With the growing trend of dental tourism—where patients travel abroad for affordable yet high-quality care—many are also turning their eyes to the companies behind the technologies that make these dental transformations possible. One such standout is Align Technology (NASDAQ: ALGN), the global leader behind Invisalign, the clear aligner brand trusted by millions.
While this article highlights the top 15 destinations for dental tourism, it also takes a deeper look into the financials and investment case of Align Technology—a company shaping the future of orthodontics worldwide.
Align Technology: Dominating the Clear Aligner Market
Align Technology holds over 90% market share in the clear aligner industry—a testament to its strong brand, proprietary materials, and long-standing industry relationships. Founded over 25 years ago, Align pioneered the clear aligner revolution and has continuously innovated with products like SmartTrack material, iTero scanners, and its digital treatment planning tools.
Once considered a high-flying growth stock, ALGN traded at lofty valuations in its prime. In 2018, the company reached a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 80x, driven by investor enthusiasm and the company’s rapid growth. Even during its “normalized” growth phase, the stock maintained a high multiple—hovering around 32x P/E.
A Valuation Reset—and a More Attractive Entry Point
Today, Align Technology’s stock presents a very different picture. Despite doubling its earnings over the past few years, the stock has undergone a steep correction due to valuation concerns and broader macroeconomic headwinds. Currently trading at around 18x forward P/E, the stock is notably cheaper than its historical average.
Market consensus expects approximately 10% annual earnings growth for the next three years—driven by increased global adoption of clear aligners, digital dentistry trends, and product expansion.
Fair Value Estimate & Upside Potential
Using a conservative approach, an investor could estimate a fair value of $200 per share, based on a projected EPS of $10.80 and normalized P/E ratios. With shares trading around $180, this implies roughly 10–12% annual return potential if valuation multiples remain steady.
Additionally, Morningstar assigns Align a fair value of $240 and a “narrow moat” rating, highlighting the company’s brand strength and switching costs, though acknowledging risks from economic cycles and increasing competition.
What Makes Align’s Moat Unique?
Align Technology’s competitive advantage lies in its intangible assets and network effects:
SmartTrack® material: Patented aligner material offering superior elasticity and performance.
Massive clinical data: Over 25 years of orthodontic cases enhance treatment precision.
High switching costs: Dentists and orthodontists trained on Invisalign systems are unlikely to switch to competitors.
Digital ecosystem: Integration of iTero scanners, treatment simulation software, and aligner production improves patient outcomes and practitioner efficiency.
Unlike some competitors, Align doesn’t rely on cost leadership. Instead, it excels through brand strength, proprietary technology, and R&D.
Strategic Acquisitions & Capital Discipline
Align has been highly strategic in its growth approach. The acquisition of Exocad, a leader in dental CAD/CAM software, expanded its digital dentistry capabilities and complemented its core aligner business.
In terms of capital management:
The company carries minimal debt
It reinvests heavily into R&D and innovation
It maintains a long-term growth posture, avoiding large-scale stock buybacks or dividends
Investor Outlook: A Quality Growth Play at a Reasonable Price
For long-term investors, Align offers a compelling blend of quality and value. While the clear aligner market may experience cyclicality tied to consumer discretionary spending, Align’s fundamentals remain strong. It’s a leader in a growing global niche with durable advantages and disciplined capital allocation.
Regulatory and insurance changes in international markets
Yet for those willing to embrace moderate volatility, Align appears poised for a rebound, offering an opportunity to buy a high-quality business at a reasonable valuation.
Previously Featured: Comparing Defensive vs Growth Investments
In an earlier piece, we explored Librarian Capital’s bullish thesis on Procter & Gamble (PG)—a defensive powerhouse known for stable cash flows and brand strength in consumer goods. In contrast, Align Technology, as outlined by DIY Investor, presents a growth-oriented case, driven by technological innovation, market leadership, and valuation reset.
Both companies are strong in their respective sectors, but Align offers more upside potential for growth-focused investors seeking exposure to the future of digital health and dentistry.
Align Technology, Inc. (ALGN) is not on our list of the 30 Most Popular Stocks Among Hedge Funds. As per our database, 52 hedge fund portfolios held ALGN at the end of the first quarter which was 58 in the previous quarter. While we acknowledge the risk and potential of ALGN as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. You can visit our Homepage for Latest News Update
I wouldn’t have preordered a Nintendo Switch 2 just for myself. The price is high, there’s no new Smash Bros. or Metroid Prime (yet), and I’ve got a perfectly good original Nintendo Switch and Steam Deck that keep me plenty busy. At first, I could only justify the $450 because I write about gaming tech for The Verge.
But two weeks in, I can almost justify the cost one additional way: the Switch 2 is turning out to be an upgrade for my whole family.
I’m not primarily talking about hand-me-downs, though yes, you could absolutely hand your original Switch down to a kid while basking in the glory of the Switch 2’s larger, faster screen. Mom and dad always get the best seats in the house, right?
But no: I’m talking about how Nintendo’s new features are helping me share the delight of gaming with my 8-year-old kid like never before.
We bought my daughter a Switch Lite last Christmas, with Animal Crossing and Let’s Go Pikachu, and that’s pretty much all she played. All other gaming monopolized the living room TV, where she and her younger sister often clash over what to watch next.
But two weeks ago, my eldest suddenly realized that we could now magically beam any of my old purchased digital games from my Switch 2 to her Switch Lite, lending them out like a library for two weeks at a time. While I played Mario Kart World for the Switch 2, she practiced her skills in my old copy of Mario Kart 8 Deluxe; soon, I’ll play the gruesome Cyberpunk 2077 while she tries Stardew Valley. And in both cases, I don’t need to worry whether she’ll lose a cartridge.
Super Mario Odyssey.Image: Nintendo
Then we found GameShare, a feature that lets a Switch 2 beam its entire screen and controls to a second Switch, giving a second person their own screen and control for a selection of multiplayer games. We began playing Super Mario Odyssey as daughter and dad, alternating between who controlled Mario and who controlled his sentient flying hat, Cappy.
Since each of us effectively had our own portable TV, she didn’t shove her head between me and the screen like she sometimes does when we’re reading bedtime books. And since neither of us was monopolizing the TV, the younger kid got to keep on watching her YouTube videos of intricately animated stop-motion Lego food factories.
When it was time for me to fly across the country last week, my eldest begged me to let her keep playing MarioOdyssey while I was gone. Virtual game cards came through once again: five quick taps, and a game download magically appeared on her Switch.
She did have to start the game from scratch, since I couldn’t find a way to sync a save game between two different consoles with two different Nintendo accounts… but it turns out that was her plan all along. Apparently 8-year-olds enjoy repetition much more than us adults!
Don’t get me wrong, I’m still a fan of physical media, and I especially worry that Nintendo will pull the rug out from under our digital purchases given its track record of closing eShops. I think Nintendo could do a lot more to make the Switch and Switch 2 better for parents, too.
For one, I wish the company hadn’t arbitrarily locked its webcam-enabled GameChat to the new Nintendo Switch 2, as I would have loved to play Mario Kart with my daughter during my business trip. The original Switch and Switch Lite might not have the horsepower for simultaneous four-player screen sharing and video chat like the Switch 2, but surely they have enough for the webcams alone? It’s also awkward that there’s still no obvious way to merge the save games from the offline “kid” profile on my original Switch to my daughter’s Nintendo account.
But most of all, I fear the two-screens-for-one-game GameShare may not get the attention or adoption it deserves. It’s such a clever way of repurposing cloud gaming technology, but the initial list of GameShare-compatible games is vanishingly short and doesn’t yet include obvious wins like Mario Kart World or Super Mario Bros. Wonder, the newest mainline entry in the series and one that’s great to play with kids.
It’s been nearly 25 years since Mario Kart: Super Circuit for the Game Boy Advance let you hook up four portable consoles to play limited multiplayer, even if only a single person had a copy of the game. Mario Kart DS did the same thing 20 years ago over Wi-Fi, again offering single cartridge multiplayer, with “DS Download Play.” But it required conscious effort from game developers to create new single cart mulitplayer modes for their GBA and DS titles, and not every deserving game had one. GameShare shouldn’t have that problem: since it’s just streaming a screen and controller inputs, it should theoretically work on any game you’d play on a single screen today. And yet for some reason, Nintendo hasn’t turned it on for many games at once.
If Nintendo can make GameShare standard for the Switch’s many fabulous third-party couch games, like Overcooked 2, TMNT: Shredder’s Revenge, and Lego Star Wars, while enabling its own titles, like Kirby and the Forgotten Land, Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, Donkey Kong Country, and Luigi’s Mansion 3, it could make the Switch 2 an easier choice for parents who want to play together with their kids.
And that would play right into Nintendo’s end goal for the past seven years. As Mario and Zelda creator Shigeru Miyamoto laid out in 2018: “Our ultimate ambition is for a Nintendo Switch to be owned not just by every family, but by every single person.” Personally, I now have a Switch 2, a Switch, and a Switch Lite in our house. We are almost Nintendo’s dream family.
NBA draft analyst and writer Joined ESPN.com in July 2017 Founder and co-owner of DraftExpress.com, a private scouting and analytics service used by NBA, NCAA and international teams
The 2025 NBA draft is less than a week away, and we’re ranking the top 100 prospects for one final time ahead of the two-day event; the first round begins Wednesday (8 p.m. ET on ABC and ESPN) and the second round is Thursday (8 p.m. ET on ESPN).
Throughout the predraft process, the top 100 draft prospect rankings have been adjusted based on everything that happened during the college basketball season, at the draft combine, numbers and stats from pro day workouts, a number of firsthand scouting trips, and intel heard from NBA coaches, scouts and front office insiders.
Here are 25 scouting reports for the top prospects and then the remaining top 100 big board as draft experts Jonathan Givony and Jeremy Woo have taken into account recent news, medicals and intel from teams and players who are evaluating workouts to inform this comprehensive ranking.
Notes: True shooting percentage (TS%) is a formula that blends field goal percentage with free throw shooting and 3-point shooting into one catchall ratio. …PR = previous ranking in ESPN’s Top 100. …All heights are listed as the barefoot numbers from the NBA.
Strengths: Flagg was the best player in college basketball last season, despite starting the season as a 17-year-old. He impacted winning in every way possible, leading Duke to the Final Four.
Weaknesses: Flagg made significant strides with his shooting and shot-creation prowess. He is an excellent passer who brings high-level intensity and versatility to the defensive end, even if he’s not the most naturally talented ball handler.
The verdict: Flagg has built a considerable reputation over the past four years, but he still exceeded expectations in his lone season at Duke. He carried the team offensively with efficiency and unselfishness, making his teammates better while not shying away from taking on responsibilities in the clutch. With nonstop energy and significant leadership qualities, he has all the hallmarks of a franchise player. He has considerable upside to grow, as he will turn 19 midway through his rookie season. NBA scouts compare him to Kawhi Leonard and Scottie Pippen. — Jonathan Givony
play
1:10
One big thing to know about Cooper Flagg
Jonathan Givony breaks down the intangible quality Cooper Flagg can bring to an NBA franchise.
Height: 6-4 ½ | Age: 19.3 | TS%: 59.3|PR: 2
Strengths: Harper is a jumbo playmaker with a strong frame. His skill level as a shot creator and ability to play downhill, finish through contact and draw fouls should flourish with NBA spacing.
Weaknesses: Harper’s consistency as a pull-up shooter remains a work in progress, and he has things to prove off the ball defensively, though his frame and 6-foot-10 wingspan are assets that give him multi-positional versatility.
The verdict: Playing through injuries and illness, Harper carried an undermanned Rutgers team with his scoring prowess and competitiveness, despite going 15-17 and not making the NCAA tournament. He has room to grow, but he made a convincing case as the second-best prospect in this draft, drawing comparisons to Cade Cunningham and James Harden along the way. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-7 ½ | Age: 18.8 | TS%: 54.0 | PR: 3
Strengths: Bailey is a dynamic shotmaker with great size. He can score from all over the floor, and he puts points on the board in bunches when he finds an offensive rhythm. He also brings a high level of intensity defensively while making an impact in transition with his strong physical tools.
Weaknesses: His tendency to lean on tough shots has hurt his efficiency this season, as his decision-making, ballhandling ability, passing and off-ball defense are still in the early stages of development.
The verdict: No player in this draft can score like Bailey can when he is firing on all cylinders, and his combination of scoring instincts and explosiveness is hard to come by. Bailey, 18, has some rough edges to smooth out on both ends but has significant upside. He began to show the ability to impact games beyond scoring late in the season. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-4 | Age: 19.8 | TS%: 56.1 | PR: 4
Strengths: Edgecombe is the most explosive athlete in this draft. He complements his considerable upside as a playmaker defensively with an evolving perimeter skill level and feel for the game.
Weaknesses: How Edgecombe operates on and off the ball at Baylor, his ballhandling, ability to play with pace and make shots off the dribble are still a work in progress.
The verdict: After a revealing summer playing alongside NBA players for the Bahamas national team, Edgecombe had a strong season at Baylor, finding ways to produce as a secondary ball handler amid bouts of inconsistency. Where he fits best offensively is still a matter of debate, but his explosiveness, tools, defensive upside and strong off-court intangibles are not. — Jonathan Givony
play
1:25
VJ Edgecombe’s high-flying game is ready for the next level
Check out highlights from Baylor freshman VJ Edgecombe ahead of the 2025 NBA draft.
Height: 6-4 ¾ | Age: 19.2 | TS%: 56.1 | PR: 5
Strengths: Johnson is a dynamic shotmaker. He put relentless pressure on opposing defenses as a freshman at Texas with his insatiable hunger for putting the ball in the basket.
Weaknesses: He’s still figuring out how to score efficiently inside the arc, leaning heavily on his ability to make tough shots, while looking unengaged at times defensively. It raises questions about how he impacts winning on nights his jumper isn’t falling.
The verdict: Long known for his touch and versatility as a perimeter scorer, Johnson backed that up with one of the more productive scoring seasons of any freshman in recent history to will Texas to the NCAA tournament. Even if his youth is apparent defensively, and he will have to adjust to a more structured offensive role, he shouldn’t have a problem providing a scoring punch at the NBA level. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-5 | Age: 19.8 | TS%: 64.8 | PR: 8
Strengths: Knueppel is an outstanding shooter with an excellent feel for the game, both as a passer and defender, which gives him a high floor as a plug-and-play wing.
Weaknesses: With an average combination of length and explosiveness, there are question marks surrounding how his shot creation, finishing and one-on-one defensive prowess will translate against better competition.
The verdict: Perimeter shooting is always at a premium. Knueppel is not just an exceptional spot-up threat and shooter on the move, but he also displayed his smarts and toughness with his ability to find other ways to put the ball in the basket. The maturity of his game, competitiveness and unselfishness helped him play a significant role in Duke’s Final Four run, notably stepping up when Cooper Flagg was injured in the ACC tournament. — Jonathan Givony
play
1:23
The highlights that make Kon Knueppel a top NBA prospect
Check out highlights from Duke freshman Kon Knueppel ahead of the 2025 NBA draft.
Height: 7-0 ¾ | Age: 18.7 | TS%: 74.7 | PR: 6
Strengths: Maluach, the gem of the NBA Academy Africa project, is a skilled and physically gifted center. His 7-foot-7 wingspan changed everything around the rim in his lone season at Duke.
Weaknesses: Maluach’s lack of experience showed on both ends of the floor; he’s still growing into his excellent frame, but he’s looking a bit slow with his processing speed at times on both ends of the floor. He shows potential as a shooter, but has not yet consistently demonstrated it in games.
The verdict: Maluach, 18, possesses obvious upside as a lob threat and rim protector, with room to grow into more as his frame and skill level evolve. The South Sudanese big man is one of the youngest players in this draft and sometimes played like that, but he has the intensity, tools and mentality teams covet in prospects in his mold. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-2 ½ | Age: 18.6 | TS%: 57.0 | PR: 7
Strengths: Fears, who reclassified and enrolled at Oklahoma as a 17-year-old, was the fastest riser in this season’s crop of one-and-done prospects, breaking out as one of the most creative and dynamic playmakers in college basketball.
Weaknesses: Fears struggled to make an impact defensively with his lack of strength and experience. He will need to make strides with his frame and jumper to maximize his talent with the ball.
The verdict: No player in this draft handles the ball quite like Fears does. His surge to lottery-pick status was predicated mainly on how skillful he is creating off the bounce and how effectively he handled the transition from high school basketball to the gauntlet of the SEC. While he still has areas to improve to unlock his potential, he can take pride in his ability to get wherever he wants with the ball, as his jumper, decision-making and defense continue to improve. — Jonathan Givony
play
1:41
The highlights that have Jeremiah Fears destined for the NBA
Check out highlights from Oklahoma freshman Jeremiah Fears as the 2025 NBA draft looms.
Strengths: Essengue is a rangy, versatile power forward who filled up the box score on both ends of the floor playing at a very high level of competition in the EuroCup and German BBL. Despite being the second-youngest player in this draft, he can get to the free throw line and his passing and defensive playmaking give him considerable upside to grow into.
Weaknesses: His narrow frame might make it difficult to operate inside the paint in the NBA. And his inconsistency from the perimeter might prevent his opportunistic scoring from translating to the league.
The verdict: Essengue scored steadily around the rim for Ulm, made plays off the ball, attacked the rim with long strides and drew fouls at an exceptional rate despite his youth and lack of strength. He has shown real promise with his feel for the game and ability to cover ground defensively. He still has some areas to improve to solidify his role in the NBA. However, he was the best player on the floor in quite a few games this season, which is rare for someone his age. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-4 ¾ | Age: 19.0 | TS%: 59.8 | PR: 10
Strengths: Jakucionis dissects defenses out of pick-and-rolls with great positional size, smarts and playmaking savvy. There is considerable confidence in his shotmaking prowess.
Weaknesses: Not exceptionally explosive, Jakucionis struggled with turnovers and shooting consistency as opposing defenses locked in on him late in the season. He has some questions to answer on the defensive end and with learning to stay in front of quicker guards.
The verdict: Among the most polished pick-and-roll playmakers in this class, Jakucionis flashed a promising blend of size, feel, vision and toughness for much of the season. Though the scrutiny of carrying an offense through the rigorous Big Ten slate at 18 years old took a toll on him at times, the talent he flashed in his brightest moments leaves considerable room for optimism around his NBA transition. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-8 ¼ | Age: 19.2 | TS%: 51.3 | PR: 11
Strengths: Demin is the best passer in this draft, which served him well as a creative force for BYU. He has the ability to make every necessary read operating out of a pick-and-roll.
Weaknesses: His average explosiveness, streaky 3-point shooting and decision-making made his playmaking unpredictable as he struggled with turnovers in the Big 12.
The verdict: Demin capped an up-and-down season with a strong NCAA tournament and continued that momentum in the predraft process. His talent is undeniable, as his combination of size and passing ability is rare. He’s far away from reaching his physical potential, but his upside has obvious appeal and time is on his side. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-6 ½ | Age: 19.5 | TS%: 59.9 | PR: 12
Strengths: Bryant brings strong two-way potential on the wing with an intriguing combination of length, shooting, passing and defensive versatility.
Weaknesses: He played a modest role on a veteran Arizona squad as he lacked a degree of polish as a ball handler and decision-maker. He is posting one of the lowest usage rates in this draft.
The verdict: Bryant, nevertheless, ticks quite a few boxes that NBA teams look for at the combo forward spot with significant upside to tap into at 19 years old. Wings who can space the court and guard several positions are highly coveted, and he has the foundation of skills to suggest he can do both at a high level long term. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-6 ½ | Age: 20.0 | TS%: 64.0 | PR: 14
Strengths: Murray-Boyles is an unconventional big man with a stout frame, great toughness and an intriguing combination of playmaking ability and defensive versatility.
Weaknesses: His questionable shooting limits his value off the ball and complicates his fit in some lineups, given his lack of size.
The verdict: Murray-Boyles fits an interesting mold with his feel for the game, physicality, defensive instincts and passing vision. He overcame his lack of size with physicality on both ends at times over the past two seasons at South Carolina. His versatility could be a real asset at the next level, especially if he can eventually learn to keep defenders honest on the perimeter. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-9 ¼ | Age: 20.4 | TS%: 60.0 | PR: 13
Strengths: Queen is the most skilled big man in this draft. His ability to create shots facing the basket, pass and utilize his frame in the post makes him a significant mismatch.
Weaknesses: He lacks length and explosiveness for an NBA center and struggles with poor conditioning, which makes his upside defensively unclear. He will need to develop his ability to stretch the floor, as he’s stuck between the power forward and center positions currently.
The verdict: Queen has no shortage of offensive talent and lifted the Terrapins to an outstanding season. Improving his shooting and conditioning will help alleviate concerns about his defensive intensity. — Jonathan Givony
15. Joan Beringer, C, Cedevita Olimpija (Adriatic League)
Height: 6-11 | Age: 18.6 | TS%: 62.0 | PR: 15
Strengths: Beringer is a rapidly improving young center who has coveted length, mobility and rim protecting. He made a significant impact defensively in the Adriatic League despite possessing minimal experience before this season.
Weaknesses: He lacks polish and is still learning the game as his average skill level and coordination saw him post the lowest usage rate of projected draft picks.
The verdict: Beringer signed in Slovenia as a developmental project but carved out a significant role for Cedevita Olimpija in the EuroCup with his ability to block shots, switch on the perimeter and finish lobs. He has played basketball for only four years, but his outstanding physical tools and steep development trajectory offer significant optimism for his long-term potential. — Jonathan Givony
play
1:11
Joan Beringer’s NBA draft profile
Check out some of the highlights that have made Joan Beringer a top NBA draft prospect.
Height: 6-9 ¼ | Age: 19.4 | TS%: 58.7 | PR: 18
Strengths: Sorber outperformed expectations as a freshman manning the interior for Georgetown. He has a feel for the game, high-level intensity and an enormous 7-foot-6 wingspan, which gives him significant upside to grow into.
Weaknesses: While he stuffed the stat sheet, he lacks a degree of explosiveness to raise his ceiling as a finisher and defensive anchor. He missed the final month of the season with a toe injury that is expected to keep him out of the NBA summer league.
The verdict: With two-way instincts, a knack for using verticality and a budding skill level offensively as a passer, Sorber does unique things for a young center. Adding a floor-spacing component to his game would help mask some of his limitations. Still, he possesses the motor, length and instincts to be a competent defender as his offensive game evolves. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-6 ¾ | Age: 19.6 | TS%: 53.6 | PR: 16
Strengths: McNeeley is a big wing with the skill level, feel for the game and toughness to fill an important role. His numbers this season belie his actual ability.
Weaknesses: A career 38% 3-point shooter, McNeeley has deep range, with the ability to shoot off screens. But he struggled to score efficiently this season, not making shots as consistently as scouts would hope (44% on 2-pointers, 32% on 3-pointers) at UConn. He lacks a degree of length, quickness and explosiveness, which limits him as a finisher and one-on-one defender.
The verdict: McNeeley filled a demanding role in his lone year at UConn, which elected to play without a point guard, and it took a toll on his reputation as a shooter coming into the season. He nonetheless found ways to contribute, but his ability to get back on track as a floor spacer will undoubtedly play a key role in his ability to earn minutes early in his NBA career. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-0 ½ | Age: 19.6 | TS%: 63.2 | PR: 20
Strengths: Richardson exceeded expectations and emerged as a key player for Michigan State as a freshman with his efficiency and mistake-free basketball. His pace, skill level, feel for the game, shotmaking prowess and defensive intensity give him an outstanding framework to build upon at 19 years old.
Weaknesses: His best work came operating off the ball last season, but he is undersized at the NBA level even for the point guard position. He is left-hand dominant and looks somewhat passive at times as a shot creator.
The verdict: Richardson improved significantly as the season moved on, seizing the opportunity to play a bigger role in the Spartans’ offense when they needed a jolt amid a late-season slump. His floor spacing, finishing craft and role-playing qualities stand out, but he’ll need to mature as a playmaker as he transitions to the NBA. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-9 | Age: 19.7 | TS%: 62.0 | PR: 21
Strengths: Newell’s size, mobility, aggressiveness and intensity level are considerable assets that enabled him to have a highly productive and efficient freshman campaign. He aided Georgia in reaching the NCAA tournament.
Weaknesses: Although he excelled at using his mobility to score near the rim, he has limited length for a center (6-foot-11 wingspan). His perimeter shooting and feel for the game still need development on both ends of the court to be a full-time power forward.
The verdict: Newell’s activity level, ability to draw fouls and finishing prowess stood out this season offensively. His jumper sometimes comes out flat, and he remains inconsistent defensively, both on the perimeter and as a rim protector. However, he clearly has some skills to build on as a jack of all trades, as his frame improves and his game evolves. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-5 ¼ | Age: 23.3 | TS%: 60.9 | PR: 22
Strengths: Clifford is a late-blooming shooting guard who seized an important role to grow into a two-way talent at the mid-major level. He played at an All-American level down the stretch for Colorado State.
Weaknesses: Clifford has some things to prove as an outside shooter and possesses decent physical tools regarding his frame, length and skill profile at 23 years old.
The verdict: Clifford had a tremendous season, taking on a significant playmaking role while ranking among the top rebounding wings in recent NCAA history. His instincts and competitiveness stood out, even against high-level competition and especially late in the year. His maturity will add to his appeal for playoff-caliber teams that believe in his shot and ability to contribute as a team defender, giving him pathways to meaningfully contribute on a rookie-scale contract. — Jonathan Givony
play
1:10
Nique Clifford’s NBA draft profile
Check out some stats and info that have made Colorado State’s Nique Clifford a top NBA draft prospect.
Height: 6-5 ¼ | Age: 21.7 | TS%: 71.0 | PR: 29
Strengths: Coward ticks several boxes NBA scouts are actively seeking on the wing, with a sweet shooting stroke to go along with a 7-foot-2 wingspan and more upside than most 21-year-olds.
Weaknesses: He played only six games this season before injuring his shoulder, leaving scouts with a limited sample size to evaluate the question marks they have regarding his ballhandling, feel for the game, defensive awareness and toughness.
The verdict: Rising out of the Division III ranks to develop into a standout at Eastern Washington and then, briefly, a star at Washington State, Coward is on a very unique trajectory. He put up big numbers in a few games against low-major competition before missing the rest of the season. Coward has been elevated in the draft process thanks to his length and shooting potential, with some scouts considering him among the most intriguing swings in this class despite his “mystery man” status. — Jonathan Givony
Strengths: Gonzalez is an aggressive swingman with an excellent frame whose inconsistent minutes have hindered his ability to demonstrate the potential he showed over a decorated junior career in Spain.
Weaknesses: Averaging 11 minutes per game for Real Madrid over a long season, he remains unpolished in several ways for the highest levels, notably as a shooter, and he’s not the most disciplined decision-maker in the half court .
The verdict: Looking like a lottery-level talent in multiple settings over the past several years, including in small doses this season with highlight-reel plays on both ends of the floor, Gonzalez still showed significant flashes of ability as a transition scorer, pick-and-roll passer and, especially, a versatile defender, despite not having the luxury of playing through mistakes. Becoming a better shooter will be key for unlocking the value of his explosiveness and competitiveness at the highest levels. — Jonathan Givony
play
0:54
Hugo Gonzalez’s NBA draft profile
Check out some of the highlights that have made Hugo Gonzalez a top NBA draft prospect.
Strengths: Traore is a reasonably sized guard with an intriguing mix of burst and passing creativity who played a significant role for Saint-Quentin in the French first division.
Weaknesses: He struggled at times with his shooting, finishing, decision-making and defense, hesitating at times. He isn’t always assertive, lacking a degree of physicality and leadership qualities.
The verdict: At his best moments, Traore was a creative force who scored prolifically both inside and outside, showcasing high-level vision in pick-and-roll situations. However, he struggled with turnovers, efficiency and overall consistency for large stretches of the season. His ability to fill out his slender frame and operate with more force attacking the rim, along with maturing in his approach, could elevate his game to a different level. His speed, ballhandling and overall talent offer interesting long-term potential to develop. — Jonathan Givony
Strengths: Riley is a tall, fluid wing with the scoring instincts and aggressiveness to put points on the board from anywhere on the floor. He has plenty of upside to continue to grow into.
Weaknesses: With a thin frame, he lacks a degree of burst and physicality, hampering his performance on the defensive end and efficiency attacking the rim. He shot only 33% on his 3s this season.
The verdict: Riley nevertheless flashed significant shotmaking talent, as well as intriguing playmaking ability, creating for others when sliding into a bigger role on the ball midyear. Even if he is not the longest or most imposing athlete, his flashes of offensive talent are tantalizing, giving him the potential to develop into the type of dynamic wing scorer every team seeks as his body continues to mature. — Jonathan Givony
Height: 6-10 ½ | Age: 21.1 | TS%: 56.6 | PR: 19
Strengths: Wolf has good guard skills for his size. His playmaking ability evolved significantly under Michigan coach Dusty May, as he made the transition from the Ivy League to the Big Ten appear effortless.
Weaknesses: Turnovers were a problem, and he has some things to prove as a shooter (34% on 3-pointers, 59% on free throws). He lacks the ideal quickness and explosiveness to facilitate his defensive transition to the NBA.
The verdict: Wolf came close to a few triple-doubles on numerous occasions this season and was one of the most distinctive offensive talents in the college game, running pick-and-rolls while filling the stat sheet with rebounds and blocks due to his exceptional basketball instincts. Improving his shooting consistency and demonstrating his ability to guard either power forwards or centers will be crucial in establishing a role early in his NBA career. — Jonathan Givony
play
1:31
Rasheer Fleming’s NBA draft profile
Check out some of the highlights that have made Rasheer Fleming a top NBA draft prospect.
Jonathan Givony is an NBA draft expert and the founder and co-owner of DraftExpress.com, a private scouting and analytics service used by NBA, NCAA and international teams.
Jeremy Woo is an NBA analyst specializing in prospect evaluation and the draft. He was previously a staff writer and draft insider at Sports Illustrated.
“There’s no bigger reward or responsibility that I have ever felt in my life above being a father,” the singer wrote in a Father’s Day Instagram tribute alongside photos of him hugging his boys. “To teach and to learn at the same time… I feel beyond blessed.”
It’s a feeling that comes with no strings attached.
“I see my two dads, my grandfathers, my uncles more and more clearly every year that I get to experience this life with them,” Justin added in his June 15 post. “And I see myself more and more clearly in every moment I have with my sons, watching who they continue to become. You can’t put a price tag on that type of generational wealth!”
So if you find yourself asking, what’s the deal with this pop life, allow this dad to explain. Calling his sons his “2 greatest gifts,” the *NSYNC alum wrote in a Father’s Day message last year, “I learn more about myself everyday just because you both chose me to be your Dad. I will always be there for you through your peaks and valleys… to lift you up and show you how high you can take this life and to pick you up when you fall. And, of course, to flood you with insufferable Dad-jokes all along the way. I love you both so much. Thank you for giving me my biggest purpose.”
A superyacht has been raised from the seabed nearly a year after it sank off the coast of Sicily, killing seven of the 22 people on board.
Italian officials said the luxury yacht – known as the Bayesian – would be held up by a crane for a series of inspections requested by the public prosecutor’s office. It will later be fully removed from the water.
The Bayesian was owned by British tech tycoon Mike Lynch, who died in the incident alongside his 18-year-old daughter Hannah and five others.
Last month, an ongoing investigation found that Mr Lynch and the crew were unaware of some of the boat’s vulnerabilities – including that wind speeds of over 73mph could topple it.
Footage from the salvage operation shows the hull of the 56m (183ft) vessel – which looks badly damaged and covered in mud – being lifted up by cranes.
In some images, the ship’s name can be seen on the stern of the yacht as it is finally lifted above the water.
The vessel is expected to be taken to the nearby port of Termini Imerese on Monday, where Italian prosecutors investigating the sinking are based.
Peter Byrne/PA Wire
The ship’s name is barely visible on its stern
Peter Byrne/PA Wire
A salvage operation is pumping water out of the ship before checks are carried out
The Bayesian had been anchored off the port of a small fishing village, Porticello, when it sank in the early hours of 19 August last year.
Among the victims were Mr Lynch, 59, and his daughter Hannah; Morgan Stanley International bank chairman Jonathan Bloomer, 70, and his wife, Judy Bloomer, 71, who were all British nationals.
US lawyer Chris Morvillo and his wife Neda Morvillo, and Canadian-Antiguan national Recaldo Thomas, who was working as a chef on the vessel, also died in the sinking.
Fifteen people, including Mr Lynch’s wife, Angela Bacares, were rescued.
Several California Democrats slammed Vice President Vance after he referred to Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) as “Jose” during a Friday presser in Los Angeles.
“I was hoping Jose Padilla would be here to ask a question,” Vance said, referring to Padilla’s forcible removal from a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) press conference last week.
“I guess he decided not to show up because there wasn’t a theater,” he continued.
Democrats railed against Vance for misnaming the state’s first Latino senator, who the vice president served alongside before his successful White House bid.
“Calling him ‘Jose Padilla’ is not an accident,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) said in a Friday post on the social media platform X.
Newsom also urged Vance, who spoke about the governor’s response to unrest sparked by mass Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids in the region, to make remarks to his face during a debate, instead of online or during public events in a later post.
While Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D) echoed the governor’s concerns, she cited potential racial undertones in Vance’s remarks.
“I guess he just looked like anybody to you, but he’s not just anybody to us. He is our senator,” Bass said during a Friday presser.
“Mr. Vice President, how dare you disrespect Senator Alex Padilla like that? You serve with him in the Senate right now. You know him,” Bass wrote in a post on X, referring to the vice president’s role as president of the upper chamber.
However, Vance’s spokesperson said the mix up was an innocent mistake.
“He must have mixed up two people who have broken the law,” Taylor Van Kirk, a spokesperson for Vance told reporters on Friday.
But Padilla’s colleagues aren’t buying it.
“JD Vance served alongside Alex Padilla, and knows better. He’s taking this cheap shot to distract from the real fear and havoc this Administration is creating,” Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) wrote in a Friday post on X. “It’s pathetic.”
The vice president’s visit to Los Angeles came a day after a federal appeals ruledPresident Trump could retain control of the California National Guard in response to the protests.
Both Bass and Newsom have encouraged the Trump administration to remove the forces from Los Angeles, arguing the city is safer without federal forces.
Democratic lawmakers have continued to question the conditions detained illegal immigrants are being held under as well as law enforcement’s use of physical force against protesters and members of Congress seeking to conduct oversight of immigration operations.
The future of the internet will be determined in one building in Washington, DC — and for six weeks, I watched it unfold.
For much of this spring, the E. Barrett Prettyman Courthouse in downtown Washington, DC, was buzzing with lawyers, reporters, and interested onlookers jostling between dimly lit courtrooms that hosted everyone from the richest men in Silicon Valley to fired federal workers and the DOGE-aligned officials who terminated them. The sprawling courthouse, with an airy atrium in the middle and long, dark halls that spring from it, is where cases involving government agencies often land, and that meant it was hosting two of the most consequential tech cases in the country, all while fielding a flurry of unprecedented lawsuits against President Donald Trump’s administration.
Between mid-April and late May, Judges James Boasberg and Amit Mehta respectively oversaw FTC v. Meta and US v. Google, a pair of long-running antitrust lawsuits that seek to split up two titans of Silicon Valley. Over the same period, several DC judges — including Boasberg — had a full docket of cases related to Trump’s first 100 days in office, covering the administration’s attempt to mass-deport immigrants, strip security clearance from law firms, and fire thousands of federal workers. On the first day of the Google trial, a sign with a comically contorted arrow directed visitors toward their chosen antitrust case. It was soon joined by directions to the high-profile hearing over Trump’s order against law firm Jenner & Block. While the FTC’s lawyers were calling witnesses against Meta in one courtroom, a nearby room was hosting arguments about whether Trump could fire two of the agency’s own commissioners.
My colleagues gathered around the feed waiting for a Google witness, only to see a prison-jumpsuited defendant step into the box
For reporters, the weeks were an exercise in constant case-juggling. During the overlap of Google and Meta, I’d arrive to long security lines that would sometimes jut into the small park that adjoins the courthouse, waiting to hunt down a media room that streamed video for reporters and avoid the electronics-free courtrooms. I’d occasionally show up to find out no such room existed, and in a small stampede of reporters, I’d rush up a few flights of spiral stairs to the courtroom, scribbling handwritten notes from the back rows. One day, my colleagues gathered around the feed waiting for a Google witness, only to see a prison-jumpsuited defendant step into the box — in the brief moment before reporters realized Mehta was taking a quick break for a criminal hearing, they wondered which high-profile tech executive it was.
For the judges, the gauntlet seemed nothing short of exhausting. Boasberg, chief judge of the US District Court in DC, had been assigned to the Meta case long before Trump took office, but after the inauguration, he became one of the busiest judges in America — overseeing a challenge of the administration’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport migrants, and a lawsuit over Trump’s cabinet’s use of encrypted messaging app Signal to communicate about attack plans. As I concluded a day of the Meta trial at 5PM, a fresh crop of reporters arrived to cover Boasberg’s consideration of the Alien Enemies Act, which Trump was using to deport Venezuelan migrants to El Salvador. Outside the courtroom, Boasberg fielded attacks from Trump — who labeled him a “Radical Left Lunatic” and a “troublemaker and agitator” and called for his impeachment.
At the Meta trial, Boasberg appeared even-keeled — sometimes to the point of boredom. He rarely mentioned the rest of his docket beyond subtle references to his overflowing schedule; his interventions were astute, signaling a deep understanding of the case. But he’d often sit with his head in his hand, only occasionally gently encouraging attorneys to move on from a particularly tedious line of questioning. He used a lunch break in the Meta trial to file one of the most scathing legal rulings of the early Trump administration, accusing the administration of “willful disregard” for his temporary restraining order on deportation flights to El Salvador, with “probable cause” to find it in criminal contempt.
By the Meta trial’s end in late May, Boasberg sounded relieved as the final day wrapped. “I will take a welcome respite from thinking about this between now and when the first brief is due,” he told the attorneys.
In 1998, the E. Barrett Prettyman courthouse played host to another tech giant fighting for its life: Microsoft. US v. Microsoft was a landmark monopoly case that determined the company had illegally wielded its dominance over Intel-compatible PC operating systems to tamp down threats to its monopoly, including up-and-coming web browsers like Netscape. But in the wake of that case and subsequent settlement, regulators took a hands-off approach to the next generation of tech companies. It would take two decades for the government to return to the battleground — until 2020, when the cases against Meta and Google were filed.
The search and social networking landscape has changed dramatically in the last five years, with the rise of TikTok and generative AI. But so too has the zeitgeist around tech. As Silicon Valley remains politically embattled, the goal of more aggressive antitrust enforcement has won bipartisan support.
At the same time, there’s a growing fear of foreign competition, particularly from TikTok, which appeared in the very same courthouse last year to argue against a (since-delayed) nationwide ban. The company found itself back there as a witness during Meta’s trial, where lawyers confronted a TikTok executive with statements made during its failed 2024 fight.
Those weeks of courthouse testimony helped illuminate countless decisions that made the tech world as we know it
Inside the courthouse, it was easy to forget about everything else going on in Washington — until it wasn’t. I was removed from the day-to-day antics of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) hacking away at the federal workforce, but the cases about its handiwork — including gutting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) — kept winding through court. During a break on the fourth day of Meta’s trial and days before the start of Google’s, I got a New York Times push notification walking back from the bathroom, telling me Virginia Judge Leonie Brinkema had ruled against Google in the DOJ’s separate ad-tech antitrust case. I hustled back to the media room and found several of my colleagues from other outlets already in the hallway writing up their stories. Of course, we commiserated, a decision we expected months ago would drop right now.
Rulings in this spring’s Google and Meta trials will likely take months to arrive, and their fallout probably won’t be seen for years. But those weeks of courthouse testimony helped illuminate countless decisions that made the tech world as we know it. During the early 2010s, Facebook executives expressed fears that Google might buy WhatsApp and bundle it with Android, giving itself a stranglehold over mobile messaging. With the context of the Google trial, that fear looks prescient — the company cemented its search dominance by making Android phone makers preinstall its search engine in the same way.
It’s also possible to see the shape of giants yet to rise. Should Judge Mehta order Google to sell Chrome, several witnesses said they’d be more than happy to buy it, including Yahoo, Perplexity, and OpenAI. The Justice Department’s landmark antitrust trial against Microsoft is widely credited with opening up the tech industry for innovative players like Google, and a quarter-century later, there’s hope something similar could happen for new companies today. Yet it seems equally possible that in another decade or two, we’ll be back in this same courthouse, hearing the government argue they’ve nailed the doors shut once again.
BBC
