(01-09-2026, 11:19 PM)Smitty Wrote: Earlier today I came up with a way to get him back to GSW. It makes sense for all parties. At least with the reports we’ve heard.

GSW: Klay+Gafford [-$665k Cap]
CHI: Kuminga+Hield  [+$750k Cap]
DAL: C. White+Z.Collins [-$83k Cap]

(01-10-2026, 02:26 AM)F Gump Wrote: I figure that the AD-to-ATL trade ideas are dead now, but there's possibly some now-or-never urgency for ATL because the KP salary as a trade match for AD is gone once we get to the summer.

In thinking about that, I was fiddling with the numbers using the observation upthread that maybe OO and R are not in ATL's future plans (so, to ATL, they are spare parts, and they might be contracts THEY want to move as much as we want to move ones like Martin, Hardy, and DAR). It's also possible the Hawks could see past the injury-of-the-day for AD and decide they would rather get him in March or so, for their unwanted parts, rather than not at all.

If so (yes, iffy, but also possible), then here's a trade where the numbers work AND it fits all the info, AND both teams get the benefit of clearing unwanted salaries from their roster:
AD, DAR, Hardy, Martin
KP, OO, Ris, Kennard

It's a roster balanced 4-for-4 (which both teams need), both teams are able to send out a couple of unwanted players, and ATL stays under the tax line (there are lots of ideas being floated that are CBA-legal, but leave ATL paying tax, and I believe "no tax" is a MAJOR gotta-have for the Hawks).

The numbers also work if it's expanded to a 5-for-5 by each team adding smaller salaries like Powell, Exum, Newell, Wallace, etc in a way they feel is fair value, or it could be shrunk to a 3-for-3 by removing Martin and Kennard that still keeps ATL from paying tax (it's tight).

In addition (and important, I think), it keeps both teams in good shape cap-wise going forward. And maybe this helps ATL additionally (as well as DAL) so that ATL is even more eager to deal.

Would I still be asking for NO #1 and a future protected 1st? Yes, of course. But if ATL wanted to do the 4-for-4 (or bigger, such as adding Powell and Newell to the swap), then I feel that gives suitable incentive to negotiate on the pick(s) details, and I see ways to do that. Such as: 
[a] maybe adding protections on the NO pick part, so that if it is top ___, ATL gets it and the Mavs get CLE 2026 plus a future unprotected #1, definitely unprotected if ATL is getting the sure thing of a top ___ pick in 2026, or 
[b] making the 2026 pick to DAL be "the better of NO/DAL" instead of an outright pick, which means ATL is assured of getting a good pick anyhow.

(01-10-2026, 11:30 AM)ThisIStheYear Wrote: Gaff and Kyrie make too much money and simply won’t be relevant when this team is viable again in 2-3 years.  I’m not talking about this summer’s FA class necessarily.  Could be the next one. Dump Klay too.  Start over. Don’t trust anyone over age 25.  And, most importantly, ty out of the tax and aprons. That’s priority one.

(01-10-2026, 12:16 PM)mvossman Wrote: Assuming they don't trade AD now, I don't think you can trade for a guy like Coby White.  I don't think you can generate enough room to pay his next contract without going over aprons and paying massive tax.  

Holding onto AD really limits what they can do this TDL.  I think they need to send out Klay for space and I would be happy if they can get value out of Gafford, but it can't be somebody like Coby or Mathurin who will be looking for bigger contracts.

(01-10-2026, 12:16 PM)mvossman Wrote: Assuming they don't trade AD now, I don't think you can trade for a guy like Coby White.  I don't think you can generate enough room to pay his next contract without going over aprons and paying massive tax.  

Holding onto AD really limits what they can do this TDL.  I think they need to send out Klay for space and I would be happy if they can get value out of Gafford, but it can't be somebody like Coby or Mathurin who will be looking for bigger contracts.

(01-10-2026, 12:22 PM)Chicagojk Wrote:  Mavs need to win next year 

(01-10-2026, 12:22 PM)Chicagojk Wrote: I would not be upset if they moved off Kyrie in time.  I don’t think that is the plan now.

Gaff, pJ, Marshall are good players on good contracts.  No need to dump them.  Mavs need to win next year and can’t dump good players just to get off of them.  I suspect some will be moved for better fitting parts but no need to align all your players up in the same age range imo. With today’s cap it is very hard to keep a roster together for an extended run.  Think about it in 3 year runs.  If cooper stays in Dallas, he may have 4 different rosters built around him.

I understand wanting to break everything down but depending where they land in the draft, drastic measures may not be needed.

(01-10-2026, 12:33 PM)loki Wrote: I see no world where the Mavs go into next season on track to have one of the most expensive rosters (cap+tax) in NBA history. That's where they're headed at the moment.

(01-10-2026, 08:20 AM)F Gump Wrote: Unless it's an ongoing or career-threatening injury (and there's no indication it's anything like that), he's still AD. You just have to deal with the hassle that you won't get him on the floor right away. Have to wait a month or 2 or so before you open the package under the tree. 

Teams will weigh that, and what it means to them. Each team will see it their own way. They will play with the what-if's, and their own timelines. 

All in all, I am certain it's going to be way more fluid than we think. I was not predicting and don't know exactly when. I don't know how many teams. I don't know what offers will look like. I just know the interest in him didn't evaporate, and it will inevitably heat back up again at some point. It may have not gone away, even, and only waiting for a better definition of his timeline for recovery.

We look at this through our own lens, but we have our preset biases that impact how we view such things. Consider: if Giannis was seriously in play, and we thought we could get him, but he had this injury happen, would we want the Mavs to walk away? Or would we want them to go ahead and work the deal, subject to doing some due diligence on the injury? That's easy, right? I think for teams who are truly wanting AD (and there are far more than we are hearing about), it's similar.

All that's true of DAL as well. This setback may have made them no more anxious to trade him than they were before. 

Most DAL fans, of course, threw up their hands and said, "Trade the bum, get him out of here. Just find a taker, and get him gone. I'm done here." I get it. But for the NBA this is only a bump in the road, a road that keeps going.

(01-10-2026, 12:37 PM)Smitty Wrote: I guess it depends on how competitive you think a team with Kyrie-Max-Flagg-PJW- AD/Lively and ‘26 FRP plus the other role players can be next year.

(01-10-2026, 12:28 PM)RoyTarpleysGhost Wrote: why?

The 27 pick is gone either way.  Letting that influence your timeline is bad process.

(01-10-2026, 12:27 PM)Smitty Wrote: Klay and Gafford off your books next year is $34.7M. White is not going to have a 1st year salary anywhere near that.

(01-10-2026, 12:48 PM)Chicagojk Wrote: Maybe try to win is the better way to say it.

Flagg is a winner and is ready to compete now.  Not trying to win without your picks is a tough way to move forward.

(01-10-2026, 12:41 PM)loki Wrote: I saw a proposal somewhere of Gafford+Thompson to Boston for Simons (expiring) and a 1st. That reduces the Mavs payroll by nearly $29m next year and potentially gets them out of the tax entirely. I'd love to see a move like that.

(01-10-2026, 12:25 PM)Winter Wrote: You bring up something that I'm curious about. What do the Mavs want to do this TDL now? Would they rather have the new GM work some of this in the summer? Are there pressing contract issues that would be smarter dealt with now?

When AD was the main trade bait, it seems moving players had a certain sequence to it. It doesn't feel that way anymore. 

To me it seems like the tax may be the most important issue facing the Mavs rather than the acquisition of specific players.