The 2026 NBA All-Star Weekend delivered its usual spectacle, but the Slam Dunk Contest sparked intense debate over judging standards that left fans questioning the competition's integrity. Los Angeles Lakers center Jaxson Hayes became the center of controversy after receiving surprisingly high marks for a routine dunk attempt.
As the final first-round competitor, Hayes had a chance to impress the global audience. However, his execution disappointed many viewers. The athletic big man launched from near the free-throw line—though not from the iconic distance—and performed a basic one-handed slam lacking the creativity or difficulty expected at this elite level.
The judging panel, featuring basketball legends Brent Barry, Julius Erving, Corey Maggette, Dominique Wilkins, and Dwight Howard, delivered mixed scores that immediately raised eyebrows. While Barry, Erving, and Maggette showed restraint with sub-45 marks, Wilkins awarded a 46 and Howard delivered a shocking 47 that became the night's main talking point.
NBC's broadcast team, led by Hall of Famer Reggie Miller, captured the audience's disbelief. "47?!" Miller exclaimed. "Dwight, are you kidding me? What? Come on Dwight. Dwight gave him a 47. Dwight gave him a 47. Come on man!"
Miller's analysis cut deeper than mere surprise. "That's a 42," he asserted, before delivering a devastating comparison: "Corey Maggette, we just saw in the Shooting Stars, do that. We just saw Corey Maggette just do that at 46. Corey Maggette just did that. Man, there's some dudes at LA Fitness right now saying 'I can do that'."
This juxtaposition exposed the core problem—when a 46-year-old retired player can execute a similar dunk in a shooting competition, how does a professional athlete earn a 47 in the premier aerial showcase? The disconnect suggested either judging bias or a fundamental misalignment in evaluation standards.
Hayes received a composite 44.6 for his first dunk and 47.2 for his second effort, but failed to advance. Miami Heat's Keshad Johnson and San Antonio Spurs' Carter Bryant progressed to the finals with more creative and technically demanding slams that clearly deserved recognition.
This controversy raises critical questions about maintaining integrity in judged competitions. The Slam Dunk Contest has historically celebrated innovation, where legends like Michael Jordan, Vince Carter, and Zach LaVine earned perfect scores through genuinely breathtaking feats. When routine dunks approach maximum scores, it devalues competitors who attempt truly difficult maneuvers.
Dwight Howard's 47 became the lightning rod for criticism. As a former champion who famously wore a Superman cape during his victory, Howard knows what constitutes championship-caliber dunking. His generous scoring suggested possible nostalgia, personal bias, or a misguided attempt to boost a young player's confidence—whatever the reason, it compromised competitive fairness.
Across social media, the basketball community amplified Miller's sentiments. Many advocated for systemic reforms, including clearer scoring rubrics, judge training, or hybrid systems incorporating fan input. The consensus demanded greater transparency in subjective scoring to maintain public trust.
The incident cast an unwelcome spotlight on Hayes, overshadowing what should have been a celebratory moment. The 25-year-old, in his seventh NBA season and third with the Lakers, has developed into a dependable rotation player. This season, he's appeared in 45 games with seven starts, averaging 6.9 points, 3.9 rebounds, and 0.6 blocks per contest. His invitation validated his athleticism, but the performance may influence future selection committees.
The Lakers franchise, positioned at 33-21 and fifth in the Western Conference, likely monitored the situation with mixed emotions. While they appreciate Hayes representing their brand, the negative narrative creates an unnecessary distraction during a crucial playoff push.
As the NBA evaluates this year's contest, the Hayes incident will feature prominently in discussions about the event's future. The league has experimented with various formats, but the fundamental principle remains: scores must reflect actual performance quality. Potential solutions include implementing detailed scoring guidelines or requiring judges to justify anomalous marks publicly.
Reggie Miller's commentary provided a valuable public service beyond entertainment—it delivered real-time accountability. In modern sports media, where relationships often temper criticism, Miller's unfiltered honesty resonated deeply with viewers seeking authenticity. His willingness to challenge fellow Hall of Famers elevated the broadcast and initiated essential dialogue about maintaining standards.
The 2026 Slam Dunk Contest will be remembered less for its champion's brilliance and more for the debate over judging integrity. As Johnson and Bryant competed in the finals, many spectators remained preoccupied with whether the rightful finalists were actually competing. This persistent doubt represents the true cost of inconsistent scoring—it erodes faith in the entire competitive structure.
For Jaxson Hayes, the experience offers a valuable lesson in preparation and creativity. The physical tools are undeniable, but future success demands greater imagination and risk-taking. While the judges bear ultimate responsibility for their scores, Hayes controls his legacy and can return stronger with more innovative attempts.
As All-Star Weekend fades into memory, the Hayes controversy will linger in basketball discourse. It joins the pantheon of sports moments where process overshadowed performance, serving as a reminder that credibility in judged events requires consistent, defensible standards. Reggie Miller's incredulous reaction gave voice to millions, proving that sometimes the most impactful commentary comes from genuine, spontaneous disbelief.